American Guns

This is an argument i've made for quite some time now but recent tragedies have cause me to believe that it needs to be said again. We need to take a multi-leveled approach to dealing with the gun situation in this country.

Seeing how guns are for people who's natural guns are either small or don't work (take that NRA limp dicks) you would think that with medical advances we would have less guns in circulation now than ever. We've got Viagra, augmenting surgeries, and anyone who either watches late night television or has an email account knows that there are all kinds of pills out there to help with this problem. Problem solved and all that income for the pharmaceutical industry which, as we know, is SOOO struggling to make a profit in this country.

Unfortunately medical science and chemical capitalism have not solved the problem so other steps must be taken. Step number one needs to be gun control. As much as i dislike the idea of hunting (being a vegetarian and all) i realize that people do hunt and do eat what they hunt. Hunters deserve to have the right to own guns to hunt with. See, my way is not the only way, i do believe people need to have the freedom of choices. People do not, however, need automatic weapons or weapons that can be made into automatic weapons. These weapons are not used for hunting. They would destroy the animal to the point of making it inedible. As an environmentalist i realize that hunters are strong allies for preserving our wild areas. Sure, once in a while a brother-in-law gets shot on a drunkin' hunting expedition but hey, didn't Darwin have a good point when discussing survival of the fittest? Just please take a moment or two to make sure that the russeling in the brush is a deer and not said brother-in-law or a friendly mountain biker.

i know, here comes the battle cry of every small minded gun carrier: "but the Constitution says I have the right to bear arms". The second amendment says:

"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."

i won't even get into the militia part but lets explore the more heavily quoted latter section of that phrasing and look at the intent. With gun control people can still bear arms, just the type of arms would be regulated. The amendment says nothing about what type of arms. This was put into place so that people could defend themselves from invading governments. This was written quite some time ago. Lets look at this shall we.

Think about the types of guns built today. Even with the most powerful of guns on the market do you really think that you could fend off a modern army that has tanks, airplanes, missiles, and nuclear weapons? i'd have to say you've been eating a few too many retard sandwiches if you think you are going to fend off any government's army with your gun collection. So, unless you are arguing for private citizen's right to posses nuclear weapons stop trying to use this to argue your right to possess semi and fully automatic weapons.

The second part of controlling guns in this country is the punishment of crimes involving guns. If the difference between robbery and armed robbery meant a mandatory addition of 30 years in jail you would see a lot less robbers using guns. The risk would be far too high. These types of deterrents exist in almost every other modernized country in the world. Use the same kinds of penalty jumps for violent crimes vs violent crimes where guns were used and you would see a lot less violent crimes involving guns.

You have a much better survival rate when stabbed or hit with a blunt object. Someone with even the largest of knives (or a sword even) could not possibly walk into a crowded building and commit the kinds of mass murders we have seen in modern times in this country.

With a combination of limiting the kinds of guns legally allowed in this country and instituting severe punishments for people who use guns to commit crimes we could make giant leaps in limiting the amount of gun violence in this country. Sure people always manage to get their hands on illegal things but with greater consequences some may be deterred while others can be prosecuted and kept out of circulation for longer periods of time.

This is an idea who's time has been long overdue. i realize that this would be difficult with the incredible lobbying power of the NRA but we also really need to look at the legitimacy of lobbying. i believe it should be illegal to lobby, but what senator or representative would vote for that with all the money they get from it? That's another blog all together though.