Wednesday, April 24, 2024

    Related Posts

    A Thought on Gun Control

    Yesterday the issue of gun control (in the U.S.) came up in class, and everyone around me was absolutely certain that no one should be allowed guns. They were pretty hostile toward any minority that disagreed, whereas they should really have welcomed questions if they were indeed as sure and knowledgeable about the subject as they would have us believe. I think the main argument used by people supporting gun control, or regulation of firearms, is the multiple shootings that have occurred apparently as a result of easy access to weapons. And that seems to be their only point…

    I do get the suspicion that the current government/media love publicising these shootings as reasons nobody should be allowed a firearm – they practically say it in the headlines. That seems to be what a lot of folks do though – read the headline and say, “Oh, we need gun control!” But it’d be naive to think nothing can be staged – e.g. rise of paid protesters, and crisis actors (David Hogg being a possible example?).

    But without starting an argument, I’d just like to point something out. People need to be able to defend themselves. Criminals can access guns anyway. Gun control only takes guns off the good people, and countless times someone with a gun has stopped a disaster.

    Furthermore, the Second Amendment was established for a reason. Logic dictates that it’s not a good idea to let the government disarm the people. And what’s sad is that not only is this happening, but the people are willingly throwing their gun’s at the government’s feet.

    I mean all this in the friendliest way possible. They are just my thoughts – I’m not the most informed, by any means. What do you guys think?


    1. The founders had just had the experience of a tyrannical central government. So, yes, the 2nd Amendment was put in the Constitution as a final check to possible government tyranny. Put simply, the founders and framers did not want the central government having a monopoly on the means of force.

    2. I’m not sure you are naming the need accurately, Jack. You said, “People need to be able to defend themselves.” Not everyone can defend themselves. Do children need to defend themselves? There are plenty of old people, and the disabled. Speaking for myself, I don’t see distance well. Should I be packing? I expect you get what I’m saying. We can’t all become qualified carriers of guns, and there are places in society we ought to be able to make safe without them.

      I think people definitely need safety, and there are many ways to achieve it besides guns. For example, I have insurance for my stuff, alarms for the house, and a dog. More importantly, I have a well-trained brain. It affords me the opportunity to avoid situations of unnecessary risk.

      I don’t worry about the government being able to oppress me. If that was their goal, they already have a big advantage in firepower, and economic oppression is so much more effective anyway. I worry more about stray bullets from well-meaning, under-qualified gun owners, paranoid domestic terrorists and the occasional crazy ex-girlfriend.

      • Children don’t need to defend themselves no, but maybe the parents can keep their household safer.
        I understand your point about not everyone can become qualified gun owners yes, but generally if something happens a gun carrier is more likely to be at hand.
        You’re right about the other ways to be safe without guns I agree, there are other precautions that can be taken.
        I think though that as a whole it would make the place safer, and I’m not sure if this is the case, but people should obviously be taught how to handle a gun before owning one, to avoid stray bullets.

    Leave a Reply

    Latest Posts

    Stay in touch

    Get a summary of the week's posts to your inbox.

    Latest Posts