A friend of mine gave a very pointed analogy (thanks
Larry). When you want to adopt a kitten
from the shelter, you first must submit an application. That application is subject to a background
check, and following that check, the shelter will schedule to go visit your
home to see if you live in an environment suitable to bring up a kitten. People may grouse a little, but everyone
accepts that as a viable way to adopt a kitten.
If you want to drive a car, you must take some form of instruction and pass a test
in order to be licensed to drive. Your
vehicle must also be registered and regularly inspected to assure that it is
functioning properly.
We accept those intrusions in our lives when we want to
drive or own a kitten as a matter of course.
However, when someone suggests the slightest bit of gun control, people
start a well-rehearsed chorus of histrionics citing the second amendment and
spreading fear that the government wants to take our guns. The key point is that in a civil society, we
need to enact some measures to assure that life is protected; from the life of
a kitten to the lives of the passengers in your car.
Guns are instruments that can easily end a life and
therefore should be regulated at least to the degree of a kitten. So let’s look at the intrusive measures that
the government wants to impose on gun owners:
- Universal background checks and enhancing the ability to
perform those checks
- Restrictions on military style assault weapons.
(Personally, I don’t believe in a ban, but that these types of weapons should
be limited to registered collectors or specialty firing ranges.)
- Restrictions on high capacity ammunition clips.
There’s nothing there that even elevates to the level of
adopting a kitten, let alone driving a car.
People have the right to own a gun, but shouldn’t those people at least
be able to demonstrate a basic competency?
Yes, putting restrictions on gun ownership makes it more difficult for
honest gun owners, but it also makes it slightly more difficult for criminals
to obtain guns, and more importantly, it makes prosecuting gun related crimes
easier.
There is no slippery slope on this issue, and people shouldn’t
start comparing the Government to the Nazis if it wants to enact minimal gun
regulations (an interesting side note is that the Nazis had some of the most
liberal gun regulations of any government, for everyone except the Jews). Therefore, if you are a responsible gun
owner, good, I’m in full support of you.
If the zombie apocalypse happens, I want you right there next to me
double tapping each and every zombie we find.
However, if we can enact some regulations on firearms in this country
that even comes close to the level achieved by a person wanting to adopt a
kitten, then I believe we’ve at least made a statement that says we respect the
safety of our population.
