Recently I had an individual engage me in debate on twitter and he couldn’t understand why I felt like I was being victimized for him saying firearms should be taken from law-abiding citizens.
Today I stumbled across something that put it oh so well. (Emphasis mine).
There is a perception that a gun will turn a sane man, or woman, into a crazed, trigger-happy criminal, or that a gun is a gross over-reaction to the threat of rape. I contend that the gun is a great equalizer. Why do only criminals, police and nut-cases get to have guns? Do we, the potential victims, not get access to these same implements, so that we might properly defend ourselves? In fact, might we have these tools so we no longer have to be victims? Maybe we can take some action in preserving our own safety instead of just staying in well-lit areas and hoping for the best.
The other side of this debate doesn’t seem to understand that they are forcing potential victims to have to be complicit in their own attack. The arguments are “for the greater good”, often because they think that crime merely exists because of the firearm. First it assumes that the limitation on access will have an effect on criminal access to arms. That’s impossible and history in both England and Australia both have proven that. Also it ignores the truth about collective punishment and responsibility.
Further, how do you effectively ban something that can be made from simple materials available at Home Depot and soon will not need much more than the ability to hit print? What effect does gun control accomplish other than provide methods to prevent the law-abiding from carrying defensive arms?
Honestly, those who support gun control, answer the question, criminals and crazy people can obtain a weapon if they so feel like it, what good do gun laws do? If someone is intent on killing someone else, they have numerous weapons to substitute even if they cannot get a firearm. I also love how some people call for “reasonable restrictions on firearms” and then compare it to cars as if they are some how more regulated.
So, let me get this straight:
I could continue but why bother? The fact is there is law after law that does nothing to stop criminals, but does everything possible to prevent law-abiding citizens from obtaining effective arms for their own defense. The idea that cars are some how more regulated than firearms is false. While they are “registered” that is done as a tax measure as the vehicle is considered titled property. Further obtaining a license is simple and easy and it is recognized in all 50 states. I am required by law to muffle my vehicle, however the law prevents me from muffling my firearms. My license is recognized in all 50 states without question while my CPL is not. My vehicle is required to meet a minimum standard of safety requirements, read headlights, tail lights, blinkers, seat belts, but the remainder of the car can be left up to my imagination. Further if I buy an old car frame, some of the safety requirements are lifted.
The fact is, guns are extremely heavily regulated and it is the law-abiding who is on the short end of the stick. It is the law-abiding who’s access is restricted. Think I’m pulling your leg? Let’s as some members of a gang in Chicago (h/t Sebastian).
Another source of stolen guns is “the freights,” Chris said.
He was talking about the freight trains parked on easy-to-access rail yards on the South Side.
“You bust the lock,” he said. “Once you get in there, you may get the wrong thing. You may get shoes or something. You feel me? But you keep trying. We tried it before and we know what kind of containers they in. They’re carrying all type of handguns — in crates.”
Consider that, with my comments from above. Then consider how hard it is for a law-abiding citizen to get a firearm within the City of Chicago, even post Heller and McDonald.
You can not look at these facts and then tell me with a straight face that gun control has anything to do with “public safety”. The public is in no way safer disarmed while the criminals are still able to obtain weapons. You cannot stop them.
So yes, when you go off spouting your mouth about how gun control would help the world, yes I take it personally and yes I will call you on it. Because the day may come where my wife, my daughter, my son, any of my friends, and lastly even myself may have to call upon my firearm to defend ourselves or our families. And no one has any business telling me, my family, or my friends what tools we should or shouldn’t be using to defend ourselves. Firearms and this community do something no other tool or group can.
Most importantly, the act of shooting and owning a gun has a profound impact on the way most women see themselves and the world around them. Shooting a gun is empowering, energizing, stress-relieving and confidence-building. In my experience, women who shoot walk taller and apologize less. They are also sensitive, caring and protective of their loved ones. Women who carry guns have already decided that their lives and their bodies are valuable enough to protect.
To which Mom With A Gun adds the following:
To this I would add only that the above is doubly true if you’ve already been a victim of rape or other violence and you’re trying to reclaim your sense of empowerment, energy, confidence and competence. For twenty years after I was raped, I became meek, submissive, withdrawn, terrified. The worst thing my rapist took from me on that terrible July afternoon was my sense that I was worth defending, that I was worth fighting for. That I was worth the space I took up in the world. That I was anything other than prey.
To which we then look at the comments made by A Girl about this community and the start contrast to our opponents.
You, you who hate guns, you gave me nothing.
All that was offered me was a life of fear, of resentment, of bitterness, of dependance…
The gun community has offered me hope and strength, and courage.
They have taught me to have belief in myself.
They have asked nothing of me in return and, yet, I would give them my life.
Funny thing is, they would never ask me to.
This is where I belong.
These are my people.
So yes I take it personal, yes I get angry, and yes the mere suggestion is an insult and a disgrace to humanity. Only a cold-blooded animal would wish real victims to continue suffering after an attack. We see how each side of this debate treats victims of violence. One wants to rebuild them, make them stronger, and faster, because we have the technology. The other side would rather bury their heads in the sand and use the force of government to make everyone else do it too.
*For those who don’t know, a collapsible stock, barrel shroud, and pistol grip are actually safety features.
- A barrel shroud protects the user from burns from the hot metal of the barrel.
- The collapsible stock allows the weapon to be easily modified to properly fit the shooter, especially handy when you regularly deal with new shooters of different sizes. The wrong size can result in injury to the face and shoulders.
- The pistol grip allows disabled shooters to more easily and effectively hold and use a weapon and depending on the disability prevents injury.
Barron is the owner, editor, and principal author at The Minuteman, a competitive shooter, and staff member for Boomershoot. Even in his free time he’s merging his love and knowledge of computers and technology with his love of firearms.
He has a BS in electrical engineering from Washington State University. Immediately after college he went into work on embedded software and hardware for use in critical infrastructure. This included cryptographic communications equipment as well as command and control devices that were using that communications equipment. Since then he’s worked on just about everything ranging from toys, phones, other critical infrastructure, and even desktop applications. Doing everything from hardware system design, to software architecture, to actually writing software that makes your athletic band do its thing.