Gun laws mustn’t prevent rightful ownership
There’s been a lot of talk about gun control lately. And I agree, something needs to be done. But none of the proposed solutions make any sense.
If we don’t do something to curb crime committed with firearms, we’re all going to lose our ability to own them. And that is a disturbing thought. But I haven’t seen a single solution that makes any sense.
I do not believe the answer is to restrict law-abiding citizens from buying or even carrying guns. I wouldn’t be against more training for those who want to carry guns, but as I’ve said before, we as gun owners should be getting that training without it being mandated. Too many people in this country buy a gun and think they’ll be effective with it without even watching a YouTube video on how to use the dang thing.
And don’t get me started on magazine capacity or bans on certain types of guns. Why should I, as a law-abiding citizen, be forced to defend myself, my home, my family, with 10, or even five, rounds – or if some people get their way, with a single-shot or even less? The criminals aren’t following those rules. Why should we give them an advantage?
No, the answer is not in limiting accessibility or options to those of us who are not a threat. The first step is to get the guns out of the hands of those who should not have them.
But buybacks are not the answer, either. Sure, maybe some criminals will trade in one or two of their guns for some cold hard cash, but they won’t give them all up. Besides, there’s been all sorts of noise about background checks, psychological assessments, and other tests. But I don’t think the federal government itself would pass a background check or a psychological evaluation. The way it’s been acting lately, I really don’t think we should allow it to be buying guns.
I don’t know what the answer is. I hope we can find one soon that actually makes sense. Because when it comes to defending yourself, it’s a lot easier to carry a gun than to carry a cop.