Gun Rights

I am so confused.  As I read postings on a variety of media it is clear that many in our country have had strong negative reactions to the March for Our Lives event.  (Clearly many have had a strong positive reaction, but that does not confuse me.  It is the negative reaction that confuses me.) The name calling, the shaming, the put-downs, the outright bullying, the lying, the misrepresentations.  I read words like “God-given right to own guns.”  Really?  Where is that in the Bible?  Did he also give the right to health care and non-discrimination?  I have not read one single proposal that calls for taking guns out of the hands of current gun owners, and yet every gun owner rants as though people are coming to his or her door to confiscate their guns.  Who is saying that?  I can’t find it anywhere.  

I also keep hearing that people must hold on to guns to protect themselves from the government.  Right.  Most idiotic thing I have ever heard.  So I picture the National Guard rolls up in front of your house with tanks, mortars, bazookas, weaponized drones and you believe your little AR-15 is going to help hold them off?  Crazy.  Owning a gun is no more God-given than owning a car and probably less God-given than the right to food, shelter, clothing and health care.  We know God opposed discrimination and promoted peace.  We know God said fear not for I am with you.  If God is on your side why do you need an AR-15?

Is it unreasonable to suggest that anyone who defends the right to own weapons designed for the sole purpose of killing people are by definition mentally unstable enough to merit the denial of their ability to acquire such weapons?  Is it unreasonable to suggest that anyone who suffers from such fear and paranoia regarding the government of the US and fear of the confiscation of personal property by such government is by definition mentally unstable enough to merit the denial of their ability to acquire any weapons?  Is it unreasonable to suggest that anyone who claims to be a follower of Christ, a man who consistently urged followers to have no fear, love their neighbor and spread peace, but simultaneously demand the right to have weapons out of fear suffers from such cognitive dissonance as to merit the denial of their ability to acquire weapons?  Is it unreasonable to suggest that anyone who applies for a permit to carry a weapon and/or carry a concealed weapon is by definition mentally unstable enough to merit the denial of their ability to acquire weapons?  We’ve been looking at this backwards.  It appears to me that the real scary people are those who advocate having guns to protect themselves from so-called scary people.

Yes, we have shed the blood of enough children, enough innocent bystanders, and enough people who were in the wrong place and the wrong time.  We do not need to shed more.  We do not need to arm more.  A guy with a gun is neither good nor bad.  It is where he points the gun and fires that determines that.  JFK was not protected when surrounded by armed men.  Ronald Reagan was not protected when surrounded by armed men, Fort Hood was not protected when everyone there had both training and access to a weapon.  It makes no sense.  The Republican Party understands that it makes no sense as they banned guns from their convention last summer.  The Family Research Council and the Council of Conservative Citizens bans guns from their meetings.  They know what they fear to admit.  The only way to ensure there are no shootings is to ensure there are no devices that shoot.

I know saying such things results in rabid responses from those who cannot imagine their lives without arms.  It appears to me the more rabid the response the more foolhardy it is to allow such folks to have weapons.  Trusting good guys with guns to stop bad guys with guns assumes we can tell the difference.  We can’t.  People who see themselves as good guys and carry guns are also very likely to go ballistic on this topic, lose their tempers, call people names, wrap themselves in the American Flag, misquote the 2^nd Amendment, and seek to quote scripture.  All those responses are irrational.  I do not want irrational people with firearms standing next to me in line at What-a-Burger arguing that they are a good guy just looking for a bad guy to stop.  That is one of the scariest outlooks on life that I can imagine.

In fact, that is the crux of the Black Lives Matter movement:  White cops see themselves as the good guys and view Black people as bad guys therefore subject to shooting.  Way too much evidence that is true.  Worse, after White cops have shot an unarmed Black man they are still labeled the good guys.  If the race was reversed we would have riots in the street, not just kneeling at football games.

The people who are the strongest opponents to any kind of gun control are the very people who should not be allowed to purchase guns.  Their feelings and beliefs obviously take precedent over their logic and we cannot promote arming irrational people with guns.

Now let’s talk reasonable limits on the purchase of firearms in such a way as to reduce mass shootings.  Such an approach has worked everywhere it has been implemented.  Guns may not kill people, but irrational people armed with guns most certainly do kill people.  Lots of people.  Time for reason to prevail over guns.