ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Gun Laws May Be The Best Way To Protect Gun Rights!

Updated on December 24, 2012
In arguing my point with friends and foes over the past few days it has become clear that many on both sides of the debate are entirely unaware of the actual language of the 2nd Amendment.... just a reminder! Note the words 'Well Regulated'.
In arguing my point with friends and foes over the past few days it has become clear that many on both sides of the debate are entirely unaware of the actual language of the 2nd Amendment.... just a reminder! Note the words 'Well Regulated'. | Source


The recent and tragic events in Newtown, Connecticut have certainly brought the issue of Gun 'Control' to the table once again, and rightfully so. I've always been a huge proponent of our right to bear arms and feel strongly (still) that these rights need to be protected. However, I have been unable to engage in the debate until now because I have been truly grief stricken over the loss of our littlest fellow countrymen. Even now, as I fight back tears at the thought of it all, I think it's time for me to join the discussion in honor of those suffering and those lost... because this matters... this matters a lot!


So - how the hell is a pro gun liberal like me supposed to feel? It's taken me quite a few tearful days to figure it out but I think I've got it... I'm supposed to feel obligated to think this through. Morally obligated to weigh my very strong support of our gun rights against an even stronger responsibility to ensure that America remains a safe haven for our children.

Here's what I've come up with... Guns are deadly in the wrong hands! Go ahead, try and argue with that!

This leads to only one logical solution... we must attempt to protect our communities from crazy f*cks with guns. The only way to do this is to improve, enhance, and intensify the process required to obtain a gun. Let me clarify - NOT to make it impossible or illegal to obtain a gun but to make damn sure it ain't easy. This means that responsible gun owners and enthusiasts might have to jump through a few additional hoops too... it's all about check points and if we put more checks in place we just might deter some crazy f*ck from getting their hands on an arsenal with which to turn their sick, delusional fantasies into reality.

Needless to say, this DOES mean that everyone jumps through more hoops... that everyone suffers through a bit more red tape... everyone endures a longer wait or a more stringent set of requirements. Honestly, I can't see what the problem could possibly be with this solution. Our gun rights are protected, responsible gun owners maintain their ability to purchase guns and a few crazies are caught in the web along the way. Can any decent and intelligent gun owner really argue with that? Does it suck that crazy people want to shoot up our schools? Yup. Does it suck that this forces us to rethink access even though it will also impact those who aren't bash*t crazy? Yup. Do we have a choice? Nope - not if we put our safety and our obligation to keep our children safe above our need for instant or simple gratification.

Will we stop every tragedy? Let's not go down that road... it's a waste of space and breath. We can't feed every hungry child but that simply doesn't mean we should walk passed the ones sitting right in front of us. All of us pro gunners are always talking about how gun owners promote safety, that they don't let crimes happen - they deter them... Well? There is more than one way to skin a cat, my friends!

We must do what can be done to prevent the abuse of our rights before our rights become so threatening to society that they are taken away.

Yes, mental health is another factor that must be addressed. But I'm a liberal and I've always believed that social programs, access to healthcare, and providing for those less fortunate or capable is within our obligation and interests as a great free society! So, if I see one more 'conservative' claiming that the answer has nothing to do with gun 'control' and everything to do with providing programs for the mentally ill I'm going to piss myself! It's hysterical - step off!

We liberals have always felt that way and may rightfully discuss that perspective - you, you conservatives who don't believe in programs that address issues before they happen or cause further damage or expense to our country - screw off... consider yourselves either reformed or get your own ideas! We've been saying... feed the hungry/provide for the very poor to prevent their desperation from harming the rest of us (aside from being the morally and ethically appropriate thing to do), provide healthcare to the masses before they show up in our emergency rooms or in need of more serious treatments at far greater expense (or simply dead for lack of care)... so yes, by all means... provide care for the nut jobs before they shoot up our damn schools... indeed - let's do that!

I keep seeing these crazy pro gun posts and this hurts me because as I've expressed, I'm pro gun... I've watched the news tirelessly and heard every word the president has said and yet I have not heard him say he aims to disarm America. I've heard him repeat over and over and over again that he supports the second amendment but that it is within his responsibility to address a growing problem by looking carefully at the laws... not to keep guns out of your hands... but to keep them out of the hands of batsh*t crazy f*cking nut jobs without the capacity to value human life... Let's not look stupid my pro gun friends... this is a reality we must face and it may very well be the best way to protect our rights in the long run... how many schools can possibly be shot up before our rights are entirely stripped away for the safety of our population.

It's true, you don't need an assault rifle to hunt or defend yourself... maybe you enjoy shooting them but then maybe they should require storage at a registered facility that will maintain responsibility for those weapons... the ones your NOT going to need to grab if someone breaks into your house or if Bambi happens to wander through the yard.

I do believe that there is much work to be done and I know it's controversial at best... but I think we owe it to our children to accept the fact that the issue is of great importance. We need to be responsible enough to rethink our positions... If making it all a little more complicated for everyone will make it damn near impossible for the crazies - isn't that something we're willing to accept for our kids?

I also agree that the only way to even begin to protect our schools from someone truly set on shooting them up is to have armed protection. Metal detectors won't stop someone who is openly wielding a gun with reckless abandon. Nothing will... except another person with a gun. Might not work every time but it's certainly worth a try in preventing further tragedies.

Although whomever suggested we arm teachers should be shot in the foot. How absurd! Will you people stop making reasonable gun advocates look so freaking stupid! It's the most unsustainable, dangerous, and irresponsible thing I've ever heard. Even if you did find a few fully trained and certified gun wielding teachers you'd never be able to get them all to do so - you'll never get that added to the responsibilities or requirements of being a teacher... I don't even think this requires any additional debunking but I could go on and on if anyone cares to argue.

So, that's all there is to it. We need to accept our responsibility to allow stricter laws to hinder future crimes. Although we don't need to tolerate being stripped of our right to protect ourselves or our right to hunt or our right to be a little paranoid in preparing for a zombie apocalypse (just in case)... we do need to think long and hard about the kinds of guns we need and the kinds we don't along with the kinds of hoops we're willing to jump through to protect our children and prevent tragedies.

Being a gun law must be a thankless job - we probably never know when they have prevented a tragedy or saved a life - only when they have inconvenienced us.

Gun control is for people, not guns. Gun rights will certainly be threatened if we keep allowing crazy f*cks to get their hands on guns. We must at least try to do something about it. I could never look my first grader in the eyes again if I was not willing to change my tune...




Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • profile image

      AntonOfTheNorth 4 years ago

      Hi, Junipersagesays,

      I appreciate your writing. I understand how hard it is to reconcile this issue. Unlike many positions put forth by 'pro gun' folk, yours puts a lot more thought and compassion than the standard "this was a terrible tragedy, but don't you dare take away my guns" stance that I normally see in pro gun posts. Thank you.

      I have only one comment:

      "the only way to even begin to protect our schools from someone truly set on shooting them up is to have armed protection."

      (Phrases that start with "the only way" generally trouble me)

      If the attackers have no problem getting the weapons, will they not simply acquire the armour too? And at what point do you open fire? Until the perpetrator shot his mother, he had yet to commit a crime. As I read it, many people are advocating carrying concealed weapons. At what point would we condone someone pulling out their gun? To prevent someone who is legally carrying from drawing? Highly trained law enforecement and military have a difficult time with that kind of engagement. What does this do in a school environment?

      There is nothing benign about a gun. Every time it is used it has lethal potential. While other tools may have the potential to harm if used for something they were not designed for (chain saw, hammer, baseball bat), when used as intended, their purpose is benign.

      This is not true of guns.

      When guns work perfectly as intended, something dies. Target shooting is not benign. It is to prepare the shooter to be lethal.

      By arming the schools, we are teaching our youngest, most vulnerable minds that a gun is a just way to settle differences, that violence IS an option.

      Which is rather what the perpetrators of these crimes believed, and why they acted the way they did.

      Better is that we find ways to make it impossible for someone to carry weapons to the schools.

      Technology that makes it possible to keep a gun from firing unless you own it, and impossible to own it unless, as you say, you've jumped through so many hoops that the chances of you using the gun illegally are remote. As you say and I believe, most gun owners are law abiding citizens.

      So was the perpetrator. Right up until someone died.

      cheers and thanks for writing.

    • junipersagesays profile image
      Author

      Juniper Sage Leifer 4 years ago

      Thank you for your comment! You make very valid points. Here is how is my take on those aspects of my argument:

      You may not be able to prevent every shooter from creating any number of casualties or from coming in full gear so as to get off as many rounds as possible. However... my point is that your best bet is someone else with a gun... I've thought it out at length because I have 3 children of my own. If someone is crazy enough to run into a school shooting of a gun and willing to be that crazed killer then there just isn't any other way to even attempt to protect the children.

      While metal detectors may catch the occasional student with a grudge, on a mission - a crazed lunatic prepared for battle can only be stopped by an equally prepared defender. Another reason why teachers should not have guns.

      I also have a hard time agreeing with many of my pro-gun friends that rogue citizens with guns engaging a shooter would not potentially lead to even more deaths in many cases. A trained marksman is not a guarantee against this type of criminal but it's the only thing I can think might ever stand a real chance at preventing a tragedy of this magnitude from happening again.

      And to your point about eliminating guns and making the laws just that precise - good luck with that... seems about as likely to prevent mass killings as teaching abstinence is at preventing teen pregnancy. We must face the reality that we can't make this kind of crime 'impossible'... I wish we could and if I thought it were even a slight possibility I'd be the first to sign up for your program... unfortunately - I've got kids in school and the wing and a prayer method just isn't going to make me feel comfortable... that's how I ended up with three kids in the first place ;-)

    • Mikeg422 profile image

      Michael Gill 4 years ago from Philadelphia, PA

      Anton's "So was the perpetrator. Right up until someone died." Is inaccurate and misleading, the lunatic in Connecticut was not a registered gun owner, his mother was. Apparently his mother did not practice proper gun storage and safety. If she had trigger locks or a gun safe there would be many more happy children waiting for Santa tonight in Sandy Hook. Great hub Juniper, I was a little insulted being a true conservative (not the ones who call themselves republicans), but overall I think you are spot on with what should be done. The only exception I had was about assault weapons, I honestly don't think it makes a difference, against unarmed civilians it is just as easy to change clips and continue firing. What does not having assault weapons do? Buy you five seconds? It just doesn't seem to be a logical argument to me.

    • junipersagesays profile image
      Author

      Juniper Sage Leifer 4 years ago

      Thanks for your comment! First let me explain that I have a great many close friends who count themselves among the self proclaimed conservative nut bag types... much as I adore these folks - I never pass up an opportunity to stick it to em a bit... especially when they make it so easy. It's all fun and games until someone gets offended... but the fun and games are still worth it in my book.

      I think the reason why this issue is so difficult for the national community to swallow really does come down to the genuine implausibility of any solution effectively eliminating the threat. If someone is willing to go that far to cause harm, they will find a way and we would be hard pressed to find any laws that might disrupt their plans.

      As a supporter of our right to bear arms I think we're stuck acknowledging the magnitude and frequency of these sadistic tragedies and even though every bit of reason may lead us right back to inevitability... I fear our perspective will become less and less relevant if we're unable to accept some changes in regulation and show our willingness to act.

      We all know there are enough guns on the streets already to repeat these crimes all too many times over... that there will always be a way around any laws we do put in place... and that regardless of how difficult it becomes to legally obtain a gun of any kind that there will always be plenty of illegal methods available to those with little regard for the law.

      So... we're painted into a corner and in our hearts we all know this to be true, on both sides of the debate. BUT - that's not a good enough reason not to try. I wish I had the right answers or the most sustainable solutions. I wish every solution didn't come with it's own new set of flaws. If there were a simple law that would prevent this from ever happening again I think we'd all be hard pressed to challenge it. Still - things can be done to reduce the threat sometime down the line and maybe going after the process or certain extreme weapons will prevent someone who flies of the handle from doing harm. You'll never get the well thought out criminal on a mission - not with laws or controls... but we owe it to our kids to make it a little harder for the stupider crazies to act on their merciless impulses.

      I guess the point is - I don't know the answers... but I do know we can't consider ourselves responsible gun owners (or parents) if we aren't willing to bring some flexibility to the conversation!

    • profile image

      AntonOfTheNorth 4 years ago

      @ Mike422

      I stand corrected. So just out of curiousity then, had the mother not been a victim in this crime, what charges would have been laid against her?

      Also, if she hadn't had those guns available to her son, how do we think this story would have read then?

      Why is her right to own the weapons in question so much more important than the rights of those families to their lives?

      It is wrong to say gun owners are automatically responsible, law abiding citizens. No human behaves responsibly by default. Responsibility must be learned AND accepted by the person in question. This boy was in no way responsible for his mother's actions of not securing the weapons. He is responsible for his own in taking them. If not his mother's, why then someone elses, because this culture teaches him that shooting his way out of troubles is a valid response.

      If the government makes no attempt to secure weapons that are intended for the government agencies of law enforcement and the military, then why do we expect the same from the citizens?

      cheers

    • junipersagesays profile image
      Author

      Juniper Sage Leifer 4 years ago

      The biggest problem is that everything you are both saying and everything that I am saying and a lot of what the bash*t crazy extremists on each side are saying is all equally true. This is simply not the result of one small fixable failure, it's a multifaceted epidemic with numerous fundamental causes. It deserves a response from every plausible angle that stands a chance at preventing more of the same.

      Mental Health

      Regulations/Restrictions

      Ownership Accountability (but that's the stickiest one)

      Protection/Defense

      There are a lot of things that can be done and at this point, in light of the uptick in these horrific crimes, I'm ready to give them all a shot. So long as law abiding citizens maintain their rights to gun ownership I am willing to explore and support all the options - and if more people say the same maybe we'll find something that works and if we save one classroom full of babies, it will be worth whatever inconvenience it has created.

      I don't want to become part of a faction of pro-gunners that is swallowed up by a bunch of hard headed extremists who refuse to bend or budge for the sake of cooperative solutions. You know - like how so many of the 'fiscal conservatives' currently feel lumped in (and thereby discounted) with their far crazier 'social conservative' counterparts...

      It's time to throw our options on the table... or lose our relevance in the conversation. Maybe if we renamed it "Batsh*t Crazy People Control' instead of 'Gun Control' we'd get more folks on board... almost anyone will agree that the world is riddled with crazy folks who simply shouldn't have easy access to microwave ovens, let alone guns!

    Click to Rate This Article