Yeah….Guns (there’s another story behind this, but I’m going to save it for later…)

Soooo…here’s a thing I make a point of not talking much about, well, not at ALL about, online.

But, I dunno, here I’m gonna… Yeah. I own guns. I own a lot of guns. I enjoy shooting and think there’s nothing more wrong with that than there is with anyone who enjoys collecting and juking up cars; because it brings them pleasure. At least, that’s what I think, even though to me, a car is nothing more than a machine that gets me from here to there…..

Soooo…here’s the thing, and it pains me to admit this, but I don’t have any problem with what Obama has said he’s trying to do with his executive decisions this past week. No. I believe that I’m a patriot. I believe in the Second Amendment. But I also believe in responsibility…and believe that that’s something that self-proclaimed supporters of the 2amd have been neglecting for years; for decades. Responsibility.

You know? No body finds it the least bit reprehensible that we have to, every so often, prove to the ‘GUBM’T’ that we can responsibly, safely, and with respect to our fellow citizens, operate motor vehicles on the roads we all have to share.And why SHOULD that be reprehensible? After all, a modern sedan, operated at state-mandated speed limits, can impart physical forces orders of magnitudes greater, at 55 mph, than a 115 grain 9mm bullet travelling at 1200 fps ever could, should either ever impact an unfortunate soul. It’s simple physics.

And the GUBM’T insists that we prove to it, periodically, that we can responsibly operate a motor vehicle. So … so WHY (IMO) shouldn’t the GUBM’T have the right – the responsibility – the moral imperative – to insist that its ‘responsible citizens’ have the equivalent skills, responsibilities, and innate understanding of the potential liabilities regarding gun ownership?

I know, I know…opponents of this analogy will leap to the argument that driving is a privilege while gun ownership is a ‘right.’ And so it is, under the Constitution. I do not dispute that. But when the Constitution was written, there was no such thing as cars; no idea that something so powerful, so potentially damaging, could possibly exist. And so it is with guns. Back in the day, the Kentucky Flintlock was an equalizer, but in no way, now, a match for a modern M-4.

The United States Constitution was intended, and is, a living document. It was, and is, meant to be a covenant written in one time that could codify governmental and societal doctrines that could apply to all times. I believe this to be true. And I believe it IS true.

So. Just as the Founding Fathers couldn’t anticipate a time when we would all be careening around in two-ton semi-navigated motor vehicles, they surely couldn’t anticipate a time when a single man could hold in his hand a weapon with the capacity to spit out dozens of projectiles a second into unwitting and undeserving — innocent — targets.

So. ‘The 2nd Amendment,’ by itself, cannot stand, inviolate, as an excuse for every crazy motherf*cker who wants to live out his or her sick fantasy in our sadly under-defended country. We will never create the disutopia of an ‘armed society protecting one another from the “bad guys”‘ that rabid pro-gunners and sci-fi authors (including my beloved R. A. H. Heinlein) espouse. It just ain’t gonna happen.

So what CAN we do? I don’t know, for sure. But I think, and I’ve said this for years, now, that there is one thing we can do to start an end the craziness.

Why not license gun owners? Require anyone who wants to own a gun to provide an, at least, a minimum degree of responsibility and competency with respect to possessing a firearm in a modern society. To obtain a drivers license, we all have to successfully complete a written test along with a standards based driving test. Why not aspiring gun owners? Is not the danger as great…or greater?

Many folks argue…”If you outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns.” And I agree. But if only licensed folks can have guns, then law enforcement officers, of whom I have been once a member, will have an easier way to enforce the gun laws that are already in place. In other words, if you HAVE a gun, and YOU DON’T HAVE A LICENSE TO HAVE A GUN, then, oh well, I’m gonna take you to jail for breaking the law. That’s easy, right? Well, assuming that your possession of a firearm in violation of the law doesn’t result in a situation where I have to shoot you dead. Which would make me sad. But would still make you dead. Your choice.

Licensing the person would not be equivalent to registering guns, which I agree would amount to granting the government the power to confiscate guns, at its whim, for better or, more likely worse. The whole point behind the Second Amendment, we we should never forget, is that the Founding Fathers did NOT trust the government, based on their experience WITH the government….and history tends to repeat itself, sadly.

No. Licensing would just help ensure that a person provides an, at least, minimum, amount of proof of their degree of responsibility to the society to which he or she belongs.

I carry a drivers license with me every day, and don’t object to the “state’s” right to require that I demonstrate at least a minimal degree of ability and responsibility to use that license to operate a motor vehicle.

So why should one’s desire to own and operate firearms be adjudicated under any other standard?

10 thoughts on “Yeah….Guns (there’s another story behind this, but I’m going to save it for later…)”

  1. Jason Yankee

    I favor a lot of left wing stuff, but I haven’t seen that banning guns makes a difference in crime. Of course, there will always be some smarty-pants liberals who will accuse gun owners of being insecure male homophobes. 😆 However, you can’t always link the two things together.

    Of course though, the recent school shootings have happened mainly cause of the lack of screening for mental illness, as in the case of the one at Virginia Tech, and for gun violations, as was the case with the New Year’s day Waffle House shooting in Kingsport.

  2. Jason Yankee

    A lot of the crime in the inner city is the result of a massive introduction of illegal drugs combined with one parent homes. I don’t think gangsters are going to follow government rules on gun ownership. I’m assuming them and the crazy school shooters would be the target of laws banning automatic and semi-automatic weapons.

  3. Jason Yankee

    We also have to mention the prison industrial complex. We don’t want to make it seem like we are blaming the victim too much, in regards to inner city crime. I really think that law enforcement and prisons are a massive industry, which eagerly enjoys seeing certain people thrown in prison.

    In fact, it’s such an industry that the prisons can statistically predict how many people will go to prison from a community, and prepare beforehand.

    As in the case of situation of poor neighborhoods in Brazil etc.. I really think the society at large is keeping a large segment of it’s population locked away in bad neighborhoods on purpose.

  4. Jack Post Author

    Yes. My point is that ‘what we’ve been doing’ clearly hasn’t fixed ‘the problem.’ As a result, we should try something else. Clearly in our society, banning guns altogether will simply ensure that the wolves will be able to run even more rampant. The NRA magazine, The American Rifleman, features stories each month of armed people (in America and abroad) foiling crimes in progress, often attempted by armed violent criminals against ‘victims’ they deemed defenseless, to their ultimate dismay. And yet, those stories stand as statistical anomalies.

    I remember reading about a study (the federal government actually paid money for this) in which incarcerated violent criminals were surveyed. They were asked whether, had they known an intended victim was armed, would they have targeted that person or moved on to another. Overwhelmingly, the response was that they’d have cast their collective hooks in other waters. Surprise surprise…

    But some controls need to be enacted. I think that one of the biggest threats to society, believe it or not, is HIPPA. The inability of responsible parties to access medical (emotional) health histories of potential gun buyers, in order to prevent their access to firearms, places innocents in direct jeopardy. Another problem is accountability. Too many legitimate gun owners fail to secure their firearms, again providing access to others who use them to create tragedies (re: Sandy Hook). If gun owners were held accountable for their negligence more consistently, perhaps that, too, would make a difference in the future.

    Those who cite simple numbers tend to ignore the fact that our population is continually expanding. In per capita terms, violent crime has been trending downwards for decades, in spite of the apparently increasing numbers. But then there’s lies, damn lies, and statistics. One can, if one is somewhat skillful, make the numbers agree with any argument.

    I took my daughter to London in 2012. Our visit was about two weeks after Sandy Hook. So, we stopped in at a Starbucks near Abbey Road, after I took the obligatory pictures of Laura recreating the famous Beatles crossing. After we left, we were about a block down the road when an elderly gent sporting an A. Einstein ‘do overtook us, told me he had heard us talking in the shop, and asked, ‘Perchance, are you American?’ When I said, guardedly, ‘Yes, sir,’ he lit into me like a drill sergeant. ‘You damn yanks, and your guns….’ blah, blah. Part of me wanted to do a Bud Spencer on him…hammer punch to the forehead. Part of me wanted to say, ‘Yeah, well, I’m a gun owner. So what?’ But the ‘live to fight another day’ and ‘I’m a stranger in a strange land’ part of me wisely led me to keep quiet and let him vent. And so it goes.

    All I know is it’s a crazy world we live in; and that probably every generation that has preceded us has uttered the same sentiment. Where will it all end? I dunno. But at the moment, it seems pretty grim.

  5. Jason Yankee

    Guns definitely are not causing crime, but rather the society grows crime. The corrections industry, for instance, wants more prisoners obviously. It promotes sentencing for non-violent offenders, and probably deters society from helping kids in need, the ones who might cause crime in the future.

    However, I think the gun debate is promoted by various lobby groups, again to shift the focus away from the corrections industry.

  6. Jason Yankee

    I’m wondering if the NRA is supporting the “gun rights improvement” ideas you mentioned. The NRA should say some reasonable things in order to sway the public. Going all out as a group saying anyone should own any type of gun with zero accountability is ridiculous.

  7. Jason Yankee

    A lot of the English don’t like Americans cause they think we have an attitude. Myself, as an ESL teacher in South Korea ran into a few funny moments. One with a radical Canadian athiest as soon as I got off the plane (I had never been overseas before), and then one encounter with a far far left Englishman who was actually in a bar joking about how cool North Korea was (a few years later). Of course, we gotta remember this was when W. Bush was in power. Definitely I could not work with the smarty pants athiest and I ended up being moved to Seoul a few days later.

    1. Jason Yankee

      The encounter with the Canadian was definitely a Lynard Skynard vs Neil Young moment and it demanded a fight, but I ignored it. That was the most arrogant person I had ever seen, and I realized athiests were not much different than really preachy Christians.

      1. Jason Yankee

        Oh I was a big Christian at the time, so he was picking on me, and also since Christians were linked with Bush and also he just hated Christians (so many in Korea yoiu know), he was just going at me right and left. Of course, we always meet people like that in life, but it seemed he was going nuclear on just the first meeting. (I went to South Korea right after 9/11)

        No I have the highest respect for most Christians and don’t mean to get down on them. I’m just distrustful of organized religion or organized athiesm etc… Hinduism does have the “untouchable thing” as well as just general caste oppression, and also we all know about Muslim terror.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *