I believe there are two views for trying to minimize death and hurt from shootings related to guns. It seems they are along political lines, the democrats seem to want to eliminate access to guns or particular types of guns. The republicans seems to want to focus on the people that use the guns that cause the hurt, pain and death.
One guest on a news show brought up a good point. We have drugs, crime, prostitution, and so on as being illegal and they are all as strong today as they were the day they were outlawed. So, how does outlawing any gun regardless of type help?
My thinking out loud has this question: So, we are upset that the last couple shootings were done with assault rifles, so there seems to be a focus on the question: Why are these guns lawful? Well, here is the counter point, if these shootings were done with a BB gun, a 22 or any other legal gun, would those who are yelling now for the suppression of assault rifles or the rifles, guns that were used in these shootings be quiet? I would guess they would be saying the same thing, how did they get these guns, should we not have laws to limit access.
I believe it would not matter what gun was used, those who want to suppress gun access will not be happy until there is no legality for guns. Not that this is there desire, but I believe they feel that if they can control access via a law, then they can control the use.
I return to the point by the news guest. We have tried to limit legally drugs, crime, prostitution and yet it is as strong today as it was when the laws were put into effect. So, how can one argue limitation will somehow reduce access?
I believe most people will find a way to do what they want, especially is it is evil. What if these individuals decided to use a bomb. We know bombs can be made with many materials which are in products we use in our homes everyday. So, should we then start limiting all things that can make bombs? I saw on TV where a guy was making Meth from homemade products, but I don’t here of anyone yelling to limit those products.
Another point was made by a news guest. He mentioned that only 1% of the people are mentally not stable and should not own a gun, but why should we punish the other 99% of the people because of the 1%.
I don’t think the gun limitation folks are wanting this, but the only way to eventually protect people is by placing the innocent in prison. The reason is, the innocent will obey the rules, the criminals won’t, thus the more we take away our personal rights, the less freedom we have and the less ability we have to protect ourselves.