A few thoughts on gun control…..

Font Size » Large | Small

I don’t often talk a tremendous amount about politics or common political “talking points”. Gun control is one issue that I certainly have opinions on and you may or not agree with me.

From top online criminal justice programs to police academies, and everything in between, all teach that as guns are harder to legally buy, so increases the illicit market and use of other weapons. This truth is often ignored by news media and groups critical of gun use, especially in the wake of sensational stories.

The recent shootings in Arizona have spurred talk on gun control all across the country. Often when a mass shooting gets a lot of press – “gun control” will be mentioned as something that could have prevented what occurred and what should be put in place to prevent future occurrences.

Let me start off by stating for the record – I support the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution. Period. I believe that our forefathers placed the right to bear arms into the Constitution for a reason – and it was not for the creation of out military and police forces.

“A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

The Minute Man statue - Concord, Mass.

Knowing the history of how the United States came to be I firmly believe that the above statement refers to the ability of the people to possess firearms – not just the government.

The mass shooting in Arizona was a tragedy for all involved and their families. It is an unfortunately reality that there are sick, crazy, malicious and evil people in this world with an intent that is no better than they are. The argument that decent, law-abiding citizens should have their rights effected due to those that are not decent, law-abiding citizens is unjust, unfair and against our Constitutional rights. Whether it be the Virginia Tech massacre or the Arizona shooting – those physco’s that perpetrated these acts would do so regardless of any law.

The bottom line is that gun control laws only effect those that will obey them – law abiding citizens. Criminals are termed that for a reason – they break the law. How many drug dealers and gang-bangers are purchasing their firearms at local gun shops following laws?

Now – here is where I may stir a response from you. Some gun control and regualtion is responsible and I feel required. I have no problem with a background check. I have no problem with a 24-hour waiting period. I do not have a problem with certain age requirements. I do not have a problem with any Dick or Harry walking into their local gun shop and NOT walking out with a fully automatic M60 machine gun. There has to be some common sense involved in gun regulations. This problem is - what is common sense to me may be different than to you. The other problem is most that are in favor of gun control is that if you give them an inch – they will take a mile. What I mean by this is every regulation, every law is one step towards their eventual desired goal – the banning of guns altogether. Not all gun control advocates want this – but a very large majority.

Being able to defend myself, my family, and my property goes beyond “God given” – it is built into the genetic make up of the human species to protect that which is nurtured and cared for. For some political group, “cause” or politician to suggest that I am not allowed to possess a pistol that can shoot 17 shots or a semi-automatic rifle because I can affix a bayonet to it is not just pathetic – it is idiotic.

There are 40,000 people killed every year in automobile accidents. 40,000!! I don’t hear anyone suggesting cars should be banned. Hmmmmm…….

One final thought. What if someone with a Concealed Weapons Permit was present at Virginia Tech or in Arizona for either one of those shootings?

Rourke

By the way – fellow Blogger Donald Green from IfItHitsTheFan.com attended a gun rights rally. Thanks for standing up for my and everyone else’s rights. Read about it here and watch the video: http://www.nbc12.com/Global/story.asp?S=13857785

Tags: Current Events, firearms, Weapons

Current Events, Weapons | Rourke January 26, 2011

16 Comments to “A few thoughts on gun control…..”

By Rudy Kearney, January 26, 2011 @ 1:46 am

Actually, there were several folks with CCWs at the Arizona event, including one of the guys that tackled the shooter. He didn’t draw because there was no clear backstop and he decided he could take down the shooter without his weapon. Not exactly the crazed maniac the Brady crowd likes to claim we are…

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2011/01/14/ps.zamdio.tucson.hero.cnn?hpt=T2 is a good interview with the guy.

On the ‘reasonable regulation’ front I’ll have to disagree with you. In legal terms ‘Shall Not’ is an absolute and allows for no wiggle room at all. Any sort of ‘reasonable regulation’ is in clear violation of that absolute statement, regardless of whether we feel it’s reasonable or not.

As you point out, what is defined as reasonable is different for everyone, and what I’m cool with may be repugnant to you, or vice versa. Additionally, it is clear throughout history and precedent that ‘reasonable regulation’ is nothing but a power grab and a ‘nose under the tent’ type thing which is leveraged to infringe on more and more of our rights. This is a problem across the board and not just with the 2nd Amendment.
By DC Josh, January 26, 2011 @ 7:51 am

Thumbs up Rourke! Good post and a reason why I read your site.

-DC Josh
http://www.metro-survival.blogspot.com
By GoneWithTheWind, January 26, 2011 @ 12:28 pm

The other day a school bus was involved in an accident and four children were killed and 23 children injured some seriously. Clearly it is time to outlaw school busses. The good news is that the constitution does NOT protect our right to school busses. So lets get behind this effort and protect our children. At the least we should ban “high capicity” busses and limit their capacity to no more then 10 children.
By Robert, January 26, 2011 @ 12:31 pm

I’m of the opinion that the words: “…shall not be be infringed.” mean exactly what they mean. I obey all the gun laws on the books in my jurisdiction, the key-word in “Law-Abiding Gun Owner” is “Law-Abiding” but that doesn’t mean I have to like ‘em!

Now, on the flip-side: I don’t think cars/automobiles are regulated anywhere near enough enough in this country.
By Ty, January 26, 2011 @ 1:42 pm

Just a couple of days ago I was thinking about laws that cannot be enforced because of the rights they violate, and I came to a similar conclusion that no matter the laws, some rights are ingrained into our being. To defend ourselves, to find legitimate ways to provide for ourselves, to just live a good life without politicians acting as though we belong to them. They may be able to make gains in the short term, but history shows that the people will always take those rights back in some form.

Gun control and regulation-I agree. Some weapons, like full automatics, are made specifically for the military and should be kept that way. In Arizona the Governor recently removed the requirement to obtain Concealed Weapons Permits and are considering making the gun laws more lenient. So I hope they make wise decisions, not just popular ones.

Yesterday on the radio it was said that someone bought fifty AK’s from two gun stores in AZ (that state just keeps coming up doesn’t it?) in just three days with the intent to sell them to criminals in Mexico before they were caught. Unless it was law enforcement allowing them to do it just so they could get the guy red handed, there is something very wrong there.
By Badvoodoodaddy, January 26, 2011 @ 1:43 pm

AMEN BROTHER!!!
By Michael Spears, January 26, 2011 @ 4:33 pm

It is funny I asked the same question, “Where was all of the conceal carry people??” Turns out there were a couple:

http://parkerspitzer.blogs.cnn.com/2011/01/13/arizona-hero-nearly-shot-wrong-person/
By 3rdman, January 26, 2011 @ 4:40 pm

It is my understanding that two of the people who helped subdue the shooter in AZ were carrying concealed. The one that was interview on Fox said he did not pull his because people were already hands on the shooter. I think this showed good judgment on the part of the ccw holders present and they should be commended.
By Jerome Kavanaugh, January 26, 2011 @ 5:02 pm

As a federal law enforcement officer with 30 years behind a shield come October 2011 I’ve seen and dealt with far too many of these incidents… indeed one it too many. The hardest thing to get through the minds of politicians, anti-2nd Amendment types, and some Pro-2nd Amendment folks is one simple fact. You can buy a gun at 18 or 21, keep it for 1- 2- 5- 10- 20- XXXX years, lose your mind and go out and do something like this or Virginia Tech or Columbine or whatever. The idea of not letting guns into the hands of mentally challenged people is a wonderful idea… but in the end, like all such efforts – it’s ultimately for nought. I carry and I have for nearly 43 years. As a child of a Western ranch family I got my first gun – single shot .22LR at 10 years of age and carried it darn-near everywhere- including town when we rode in or through in a parade. I still carry to this day tho- the .22LR is looong gone- every day everywhere. My wife at 5’2″ and 120 lbs soaking wet carries one in the purse and another in the truck…none have ever hurt anyone. They WILL if the situation demands it… been close, but no Whee-O yet. Like the man said a long time ago, “An armed society is a polite society.” It’s also a safe society and as an aside…a free one. BTW – I pride myself on being well-known as a PEACEKEEPER not a Federale JBT Law enFORCEr.
By Rourke, January 26, 2011 @ 5:35 pm

Jerome –

Thanks for your comments as well as your public service.

Rourke
By Rourke, January 26, 2011 @ 5:40 pm

Thanks Robert-

It is amazing to see a 15 year old kid handed keys to a 3000 pound death machine – with so little regulation.

Yet – for me, a 42 year old “law abiding”, clean record American citizen – I have to take a lengthly firearms class, fill out a multitude of paperwork, and wait 3 months for my CWP.

Thanks for your comments –

Rourke
By Rourke, January 26, 2011 @ 5:41 pm

GoneWithTheWind –

I see your point.

Rourke
By Rourke, January 26, 2011 @ 5:42 pm

Thanks DC –

I have been enjoying your as well.

Rourke
By Rourke, January 26, 2011 @ 5:46 pm

Hi Rudy –

Thanks for your comments.

No problem disagreeing with me – I kow 100% I am only right 99% of the time. lol.

Thanks – Rourke
By Markus K., January 27, 2011 @ 2:52 am

Hi there, I reacently startet reading your blog and like it very much. Beeing a German I do see some things a lot different then you Americans do BUT I do think that the right to own and carry a gun is very important. I do think though that the reasoning by all “pro gun, no regulation what so ever” people is flawed.

1. This whole discussion is not about selfe-defense, because in every good democracy you have the right to defend your life with every means possible. Even in Germany where I am not allowed to own and carry a gun if I were attacked and had (illigaly) a gun and would shoot that attacker, I would be justified in shooting him, but I would have to pay a fine and probably get sentenced for owning a gun without permission.

2. Car traffic is dangerous, but the socio-economic benefit of it by FAR outweighs it’s inherent dangers. Same goes for many other things in society.
Here in Germany we have a lot of laws regulating car traffic including a risk based liability. If a person gets hurt by your car whether caused by negligence or simply bad luck on your side, you have to pay the damage becuase you also enjoy the benefits of owning and using a car. Also you have rules on who is allowed to drive what type of car by taking tests [and paying rediculous amounts of cash for it]. If you compare car traffic to owning a gun then you loose. basically all goods are beeing transported on the streets, you go shopping, go to work, go to partys, go visit friends and relatives, go on vacation and so on, all by car. Our whole society depends on car traffic! Now compare that to owning and carrying a gun…

3. Even we oh so evil nazi germans have a constitution ( I know it’s not officially called that way and it was not made by “the people” but it is as close as it get’s till we (the people) decide we want a “real” constitution). Basic rights that are given in the constitution without express limitations still must have their limitations when colliding with basic rights of other citizens. I have the right to live. If get taken hostage by a bank robber and the only way to end the hostage situation ist to shoot the robber, then his right to live is infringed. This is a collison of basic rights that are granted without express premise and limitation. In order to justify the police in shooting the robber there must be a non written limitation to his right to live.

Therefore you need regulation on who can own what types of guns under what circumstances. There is always the possibilty of some nut goin crazy and killing other ppl but the effect of a guy shooting into the masses is by fare bigger then a guy goin ninja style with a knife or a sword…you can’t outrun Mr.9mm and becasue of the inherent dangers of guns in the hands of ppl the regualtions must be strict enough to provide a maximum amount of safety, without restricting gun ownership to a degree that would – effectively – negate the right to own and carry a gun.

Oh and who said that an armed society is a polite society…sorry but beeing polite comes from respecting the other person and respect comes from the understanding that the other person I am dealing with is a human beeing and my brother or sister.

That was my (longer then expected) two cents.
By Fullclip, January 27, 2011 @ 1:27 pm

Hello Rourke –

Found your site recently from Jim’s site and have been reading it daily for the last month or so. You do good work! This whole gun control issue is rather sticky – I can understand your points, and find myself gravitating toward some very, very restrained “common sense” forms of regulation in the interest of public safety. I mean, without any restraints what-so-ever, then automatic weapons could be purchased by anyone – even those with a history mental illness – or a 12 year old boy (he would have to cut a lot grass in the summer to afford one!), etc.

Even the thought of this totally unregulated environment seems ridiculous, no?

But then I wake up. The constitution is quite clear in it’s second amendment. As was mentioned in a prior post the term “Shall not” has very specific legal meanings. It is all inclusive and leaves no doubt as to the Founding Father’s intent on this issue. It leaves no middle ground. But, the way the Founders set up this country (a Republic, not a Democracy by the way) was perfect in that they allowed a way for the people to change the Constitution….by amending it. So there it is – if you don’t like it, then change it. It has been done before – but it is really, really hard to get accomplished, and for good reason. Funny how gun control advocates don’t take this route but prefer to chip away at the edges of this God given right.

Speaking of God given rights (the recognition of which forms the very bedrock of this great Republic), I found it interesting that no reader picked up on your comment “Being able to defend myself, my family, and my property goes beyond “God given” – it is built into the genetic make up of the human species….”

Uh….Who exactly “built” that in to the genetic make up?” Kind of brings us full circle on this topic. At any rate, I too struggle with this issue, and understand (and want to agree) with your position on this. I really do. It’s just when I look at the whole issue, and strip away the emotional aspects of it, I just can’t. Great Blog.