Guns Kill People
I am not promoting a ban on guns, just a ban on the phrase, “Guns don’t kill people; people kill people.” By getting rid of that falsehood, we can move towards a logical discussion of what gun regulations are needed to protect people from gun wielding maniacs and impulsive murderers.
If there was no rifle in the book depository, Kennedy would not have died. Yes, you needed a person pulling the trigger. The gun and the person goes hand in barrel, and without the gun, you don’t have the killing.
It would have been harder in WWI to kill nearly 9 million combatants without guns. Yes, the guns didn’t shoot themselves, but without the new bolt action rifles and machine guns, fewer people would have died and it would have been harder to kill. Guns make killing easier and more efficient. Without the gun, the killing is reduced or not possible.
When was the last time you heard of a drive-by knifing? Without guns, the whole event seems ridiculous.
Why didn’t Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold bring knives into Columbine to stab up the place? Because knives wouldn’t have wreaked the kind of havoc they wanted.
Would people have guns for protection if there wasn’t a threat of harm or even death attached to the weapon?
If you believe the myth that guns don’t kill people, people do, then why does the NRA and like-minded groups block background checks at gun shows, and online, that would keep guns out of the hands of people with criminal records for violence or those with mental illnesses?
Let’s be honest; guns kill. The primary function of a gun is to shoot bullets; very rarely are they used as a club or hammer. And when shooting a bullet, we hope to protect ourselves, stop a criminal, hit a target, or kill an animal. To say guns don’t kill people is a dishonest linguistic trick.
There is a reason criminals, cops, the military and others own guns: they kill people (and for hunters, they kill animals). If guns didn’t kill, why would so many people bother to own them? Are people that much into target shooting?