Now, unfortunately, I have to quote a large block here in order to comment on it (my concern points highlighted in red):
At first, outright refusal to comply with the law should it ever call for people to give up their guns may seem courageous and principled. These people seem to passionately believe that they would be justified in using force to protect what is of the utmost importance to them from being taken away. The problem, in my opinion, is that this mindset is incompatible with a democratic system of government. For instance, consider what would happen if everyone decided they were justified in attacking people to enforce their political beliefs. Democracy, the purpose of which is peaceful compromise, would no longer exist. There would be no point in voting if people were intent on disregarding the results. Also, isn’t the very idea that it is justifiable to use force rather than diplomacy to stop others from doing something with which you disagree what motivates abortion clinic bombers and Islamic extremists? What sets you apart from them if not your commitment to democracy and respect for others’ perspectives?
If you look at firearms (meaning, guns, ammunition and accessories) as simply metal blocks with tubes sticking out of one end, then of course the idea of using violent or deadly force to maintain possession of chunks of steel seems beyond absurd.
However, that is not what "guns" (I'll use this term throughout to mean "firearms") are. Guns are deadly weapons, Guns are designed to do one thing: kill. Are you surprised that I said this?
Humans may be more intelligent than, say, a bear, but like a bear or any other animal, humans are also animals... specifically mammals.
I don't think anyone finds it strange that a mother bear would use her deadly strength, fangs and claws to defend her cubs. Additionally, the mother bear does not require government approval to utilize her deadly weapons, nor is the mother bear burdened with arbitrary limits as to how she may use her weapons. The same is true, as I am sure you will agree, of EVERY animal on our Earth. It's a natural law: Protect your offspring at any cost.
We all have the God-given (or "inherent" if you're an atheist) right and DUTY to protect our offspring. As "intelligent" animals, humans also extend that duty to cover the safety of their neighbors, town, state and Country.
As a gun owner, I look at my guns as something to enjoy on a warm Saturday afternoon (target shooting). It's fun to try to hit the bullseye more than my son does (but alas he always wins). I also look at them as fascinating, cleverly designed machines. Lastly, and most importantly, I look at them as a deadly weapon that enables me to protect my wife, my daughter, my sons, my neighborhood, my state and my Country from harm.
If I said in a strong and serious manner "Come try to take my target shooting toys", of course would seem (and would be) absurd. Likewise, if I said "Try and take these little machines that I find so clever", it would be nuts.
But, when I say "Try and take away the best means I have to protect my family", you best be sure that I seriously mean it.
"Protect our Country? That's what the military is for". Do you find it beyond belief that a US soldier may need some help? If one armed civilian kills an enemy sniper that has his crosshairs on the soldier, then there is your answer. That soldier may not NEED any civilian help, but at least he will be going back to his family on two legs instead of in a box.
"Protect our neighborhood? That's what police are for". Nope. First of all, police do not exist to protect anyone. They exist to enforce law and to bring revenue into their town. Try to spot a police car that has "To protect and serve" emblazoned on it's side. Or, look up court cases that state police have NO DUTY TO PROTECT. Sure, there have been amazing heroic acts performed by police here and there, but that's not their purpose.
Remember, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
Next point is your mention of "democracy". It is very important to know that the United States of America is NOT a "Democracy", but a "Constitutional Republic". The big difference is that in a Democracy, if, for example, someone proposed a bill re-instituting black slavery and the majority of the people voted "yes", it would become enforceable law!
In a Constitutional Republic, that same vote (if it even got that far) would be nullified in a court of law as being UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The Constitution is the supreme law of our land. Even the "will of the people" can not override it.. and we should all be thankful that this is so (and that the USA is not a "democracy").
My point is, even if the majority of the people believe that gun ownership should be totally banned, the Constitution would overrule them.
So, you believe that disregarding a majority vote to ban guns is undemocratic, you are right. But as I said, the USA is a Constitutional Republic, and the Constitution protects our right to keep and bear arms, so really nothing is being "disregarded" other than the wishes of an uninformed public.
You mentioned the use of "diplomacy" to resolve the issues between gun owners and non-gun owners. Believe me, if diplomacy, discussion and common sense actually worked, we would have been doing it for decades (and I would not be writing this).
The problem is, people who do not own guns know nothing about them other than what they see, hear and read. Probably the worst offenders are the big screen movies. Most movies portray violence utilizing bombs, poisons, etc... and of course guns. In probably 99% of these movies, the actors handling the guns portray many terrible mistakes:
- A gun is a simple, clean solution. Bad guy? Bang. Problem solved. No blood, no grieving family, no legal problems, no guilt, completely sterile.
- Playing with gun(s). Doing backflips or running on walls while singlehandedly killing all the bad guys (without the gore, guilt or running out of ammo).
- Holding a gun with the finger on the trigger. That is a NUMBER ONE NO-NO! The trigger makes it fire. Finger OFF the trigger until ready to actually fire!
- Playfully pointing a gun at someone else ("it's unloaded"). That's how people get killed. The gun must ALWAYS be considered and handled as if it's loaded.
- No concern about what is BEYOND the shooter's target. If the bullet penetrates the target or if the shooter misses, the bullet hits something else. Pray it's not a child.
Of these, number 1 is probably the worst. A person who has no knowledge of guns may think "ah, a gun - easy way to solve my problem" and do the unthinkable.
The solution to this problem would be EDUCATION. Teach everyone what a gun can do, what power it has, how to safely handle one (even if the person has no intention of owning one). This could go a long way towards reducing the already incredible small percentage of gun tragedies. But instead, the brainwashed people recoil in horror: "Teach MY son how to handle a gun - that's child abuse!". Seriously? Education is child abuse?
Lastly (I could go on and on, but.....) gun owners are not psychopaths just itching to pop someone. They are ordinary peaceful mothers, fathers and teenagers. Certainly there are a few crazy people who do terrible things with a gun, but these same nutcases could do the same (or more) damage by running a car into a crowd, stabbing with a knife, etc... (no need to go on here, you know there are hundreds of ways to hurt and kill people).
Gun owners pray to God (or at least strongly hope) that they NEVER have to use their guns as a defensive weapon. We do not want to hurt anyone. We just want to be left alone. But, we DO realize that as an animal we have the right and duty to possess and use deadly weapons to defend our family and no one will take that away from us without a fight to the death.
Understand what I say: We won't fight to keep a block of steel, we will fight to keep the ability to defend our family. No person should be foolish enough to deny this simple fact.
Thank you for reading!
Bookmarks