Apparently various open-carry and 2nd-amendment-boosting groups had stumbled upon my blog (or someone who already read it and disagreed with that post told others) and linked to it, resulting in an immense uptick where what would normally be the views I receive over days on a variety of posts turning into a tsunami focused on a single piece. Some people disagreed with me respectfully, others less-so. The thing that struck me the most however was that if I, some pretty small name on the internet, can get this much attention for wading into the ever-controversial debate on gun control, what happens to actual journalists who dare express an opinion other than "Guns are just great and should be everywhere!"? I wondered...
|Dick Metcalf, who despite owning guns is apparently some kind of anti-gun crusader.|
A man, who actually proudly owns a gun, finds himself torn to shreds by others for daring to suggest that the Constitution's 2nd amendment maybe is open to interpretation as meaning folk shouldn't just be given all the guns they want until a single person owns enough weaponry to qualify as a small army. Then that man loses his writing job, and becomes another victim of those few gun owners who do more than simply own a gun, but instead also loudly obsess over a fear of them being taken away as if Obama himself is actually going to show up at their door and demand their weapons before their being implanted with a tracking chip to keep them in line.
|From the cradle to the grave...in rapid time|
I wonder if us pro-choice people would have more success at getting laws that support us pushed through if we had people as rabidly pro-choice as there are folk who petition for limited-to-no gun control. Maybe if NARAL and Planned Parenthood had the money that the gun lobby does politicians would say how banning abortion is pointless because those who break the law and still get an abortion would get one regardless of the laws--just as how those who supposedly get guns illegally are unaffected by gun control (or maybe the Supreme Court wouldn't rule in favor of religious objections over human rights). The same goes for those who push immigration reform; maybe a catchy slogan such as "You can take my green card from my cold dead hands," that threatens violence to anyone who disagrees would get the message across. I'm being a little sarcastic here, but it makes my point how it seems for some reason if we talk about any issue besides gun control debate is okay, but as soon as firearms come into the discussion you're either on the side of "Ban all guns!" or "Everyone gets a gun!" when there are so many shades of gray between those two extremes.
I don't get why we lack the ability as a nation to talk about gun control without a ruckus--I really don't. Perhaps it is a fear that if we start regulating some guns rights it will be a slippery slope leading us into the next holocaust somehow (people do think that); maybe the reason it is hard to have a discussion is that while there are many gun owners who are reasonable, it is the loud few who scream about how we are "sheeple" that dominate the conversation. Then again, it could be that very few people really care all the much about gun control but organizations such as the NRA intimidate us all into thinking it is a hot-button issue when really they're just working to further gun interests. I'm not sure what the reason is gun control discussion is so often hushed. I do believe that if we just shut-up and let those who want to have no gun control maintain free reign of public discussion however then we'll only have more crime, more mass-shootings, and more tragedy.
|One issue I think everyone can agree on.|