Let’s have a chat for a moment. This will highlight a discussion I have been participating in on Facebook regarding a touchy subject–guns. Here are some of the issues raised by folks who are “anti-gun.” This whole discussion somewhat started from the statement, “Guns don’t kill people, people do.”

—

A gun’s primary function is to shoot bullets. Other inanimate objects that might be used as a weapon have other “valued” primary functions.

A gun’s primary function is to shoot bullets, that is agreeable; however, a gun does hold other “valued” functions. Target shooting, which is a great way to relieve stress, practice meditation, and study areas of science (meteorology, physics, etc.); personal protection of life (yours, loved ones, or a stranger) that is in immediate danger; and law enforcement, to name a few. Do you want the police showing up to a call of a man who is holding your family hostage with or without guns (a sniper rifle to be specific)?

If “guns don’t kill people, people do,” then it should be fine to put lead paint on toys, then hold the parents responsible if their children get lead poisoning.

Firstly, you are comparing apples to oranges. I wasn’t aware that lead paint was able to protect me from a crazed man, high on PCP, running at me with a knife. So yes, there should be some regulation on using lead in paint. It serves no potentially life-saving purpose. This is why lead paint is now disallowed on such things, don’t you think? Apples and oranges.

Secondly, while guns and lead paint both don’t kill people on their own, people using guns or using lead paint in certain ways can kill people (as with most INANIMATE objects–they REQUIRE someone with intent to use them, either in a positive or negative way). Anything can be used as a deadly weapon, including your fist.

No one is capable of killing masses of people with a knife, baseball bat, or other objects people keep mentioning, but with a gun you can.

Certain guns, designed and made for doing so (in war or otherwise), are definitely capable of killing masses of people. So are Mentos® and Diet Coke® in the right quantities. What if someone organizes a group of 20 men with knives? Could they kill masses of people? I’m thinking yes. The possibility is always there for someone to have harmful intentions, with whatever they can use as a weapon, and to continue on doing so until stopped (usually by a police officer with a gun).

If guns were only made for target practice we would only have rubber bullets. Guns are made to kill things.

What’s your point? Yes, one of the functions of a gun is as a weapon. Are you familiar with the wars our country has fought? Are you familiar with law enforcement? Are you familiar with self defense? You should be saying, “THANK YOU GUNS FOR HELPING TO PROTECT MY FREEDOM!” I’m not going to bleed out on the ground from stab wounds, when I might have been able to protect myself with a gun or other weapon. Deadly force is definitely justified in certain situations.

Making it easy and/or legal for anyone to get a gun (especially semi-automatic weapon) is a bad and dangerous idea. I don’t see having more regulation around guns as a bad idea. I don’t see how having stricter gun laws would limit your ability to target shoot with a gun.

This is a long one. Does this guy even know the federal or state laws regarding guns?

Firstly, it already is easy and legal to get a gun. That’s how this country works. We don’t assume the worst in people, we must give them the benefit of the doubt. A cop could be “dirty,” and keep the drugs he takes on busts to re-sell. Why should he get the benefit of the doubt and not every other citizen of our country? Be fair.

Secondly, having more regulation around guns would absolutely affect law abiding citizens more than criminals. Would you rather see new gun laws restricting the law abiding citizens? Bad guys break the laws, so making new ones will not necessarily impede their ability to obtain, transport, or use firearms. The folks who do follow the laws are the ones who would be further restricted from potential things such as transportation, carrying, and owning (a) gun(s).

This ties in to the last part, “I don’t see how having stricter gun laws would limit your ability to target shoot with a gun.” Well, one possibility is further restricting the way we transport firearms, or potentially outlawing transporting them in vehicles at all. If I can’t take my gun to the range, it could definitely affect my target shooting!

Guns should never be allowed on a college campus after all of these shootings.

I think that forbidding firearms on a college campus is not a great idea. I think of it the same as hanging a sign on every building and entrance to the campus that says, “Attention Criminals: NO GUNS. The students and faculty of this campus have been disarmed for your convenience.” Further, if one of the students being shot at has a gun, it could be over right then and there, potentially sparing many lives.

—

I guess the point is that guns have many purposes. They can be used to refine skills that are used in other aspects of life, they can be used to protect lives, and, like anything, they can be misused negatively. I do not feel that stricter laws would have much effect on a criminal who wants to get a gun. These laws would restrict law abiding citizens unnecessarily. I believe that owning, using, or carrying is a personal right as a United States citizen, and is for each individual to decide whether they want to exercise that right or not. A gun should not make you uncomfortable. Remember, anyone can conceal Mentos® and Diet Coke® just as easily as a gun. And Mentos® and Diet Coke® kill people.. in masses.

///End rant. =)