Why the Gun Control Debate sounds and feels so wrong
Don’t know how many others feel but I grow so very tired of hearing about how this gun control debate is damaging others ability to bear arms. It’s the number one reason so many feel as though there are two sides to this debate and those on the other side are so focused on being right that they too do not realize that each is arguing the same thing but in different varieties. It’s sad and so very unnecessary but leaves it to humans to take things far out of proportion and find an enemy in everything we may disagree on. We are so busy looking for someone to hate that we are willing to take a non-opposing view and turn it into one of the most ignorant and idiotic fights we have yet to witness. I ask now that those from either side of this gun control debate take a few seconds and consider my argument thoroughly then decide if this foolish pursuit is worth continuing or not then I ask that each of us step back and closely examine why we made that particular decision.
First the U.S. Constitution guarantees us the right and freedom to bear arms. Bearing arms could be as simple as having a pistol and a rifle, two rifles, two pistols or several of each. Because the word arms end in the letter “s”, it is obvious to mean more than one and since it is our right to do so, that right should never be infringed upon by any government. However to say that gun control is about taking away all guns is ludicrous on its face. Gun Control should be about the style and type of gun and have no bearing of confiscating all guns. How many of you truly believe that an AR-15 or any automatic or semi-automatic weapon is necessary to protect your family and that leased property you call your own? How many of you think that it is necessary to hunt with? The primary thought about having the right to possess these types of firearms is the fear that ISIS is coming to a town nearest you or some radical terrorist will show up at your door and give you time to grab your automatic or semi-automatic weapon. Maybe the fear is you will go deer hunting and run upon a stag or a doe armed with an automatic or semi-automatic weapon so you wish not to be out gunned.
Let’s be real, barring automatic or semi-automatic weapons does not violate your constitutional right to bear arms but confiscating all firearms would. Some say that after restricting, the confiscation will come next and I say, let them try. Laws are only created by man and enforced by man and if that is truly the case, they can also be withdrawn or erased by man. When a law is being proposed to take away all guns then I expect both sides to quickly stand up and cry foul. I expect both sides to come together and make those who tried to create that law eat each and every word of it but until that happens restriction does not violate anything except your sense of arrogance and your inability to reason with those you wish to only see as an enemy.
The right to bear arms does not cover the need to own automatic or semi-automatic weapons just like it does not cover the need to own a Bradley or Sherman tank, a grenade launcher or a bazooka. It simply covers the arms that are manufactured to feed your family and yes, even for protection, if you feel you need it. For those who still wish to believe that it covers that automatic or semi-automatic weapon ask yourself this question. Which is more macho or manly, firing fully automatic or even semi-automatic hoping to hit whatever you were shooting or taking a standard 45 with a clip of 15 rounds and making each one count?