The horrible tragedy of the Pennsauken, NJ father who fatally shot his youngest and eldest son while wounding the middle has once again awakened an old dragon (see CNN article). The gun control debate is notorious and riddled with about as many value judgments and personal right issues as does freedom of religion. However, gun control in-and-of-itself is not the issue but the way it is enforced that fuels the debate. Fundamentally, it is viewed in black and white terms: regulation (all) or ban (nothing). And everyone from gun control lobbyists to the N.R.A and their respective supporters argue over its policies. Some say firearms should just be banned all together meanwhile others say no; banning is both unconstitutional and would solve nothing...
In my opinion it seems we need a sobering dose of objectivity. In order to think clearly upon the issue we have to be logical and suppress our individual biases not excluding "My Four Fathers told me so". It is not meaning to undermine or disregard The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution but rather an attempt to see the gun control monster for what it really is. Therefore, it isn't necessary to factor in belief systems, laws, and ideals that inhibit objectivity by veiling the bottom line. I figure if we are to be truly honest with ourselves we must fully understand the raw nature of guns [and people for that matter] -- meaning, the concept behind guns and there functional purpose by definition as well the human psychology in relation to weapons. Once that happens it's easy to deduce the MOST logical solution to gun violence.
The world is filled with violence. Because criminals carry guns, we decent law-abiding citizens should also have guns. Otherwise they will win and the decent people will lose.
--James Earl Jones
During my prior military career I worked in Ammunition Supply and therefore understand a thing or two about basic gunnery. The bottom line folks a firearm IS a weapon AND weapons ARE specifically designed to inflict injury; in worst case scenarios the result is death. If firearms came with a Surgeon General warning it would read as follows, "Product causes certain injury or death". Period, point, blank. Again, [all missile launchers from cap guns to Nagasaki] the sole purpose & design behind manufactured weapons is to explode a bullet/missile from its chamber and impact an intended target. The cliche, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" crystallizes the argument that the end user is to blame AND NOT the device--- so, where does one end (shooter) and the other begin (weapon)? Think about it. Perhaps it simply boils down to survival of the fittest. To quote James Earl Jones, "The world is filled with violence. Because criminals carry guns, we decent law-abiding citizens should also have guns. Otherwise they will win and the decent people will lose." Fact is gun control policy is indeed black and white: all or nothing. If all citizens have access to firearms or some do and others don't, the end result is still the same: violence, injury and death. On the contrary, [and I admit this is wishful thinking] if none possessed firearms then no one on would have the ability to shoot or be shot. In reality firearms and all manner of weaponry are likely to hang around until the end of civilization and mankind will continue to live by the gun and die by it as well. No matter the variables involved with the end user whether malicious, self defense, by proxy, law enforcement or gaming... the end result will be exact. A projectile is exploded from a chamber out a shaft and into said target in order to disable or kill. Logically, it makes the most sense to ban as oppose to regulate. Take the firearm out the equation rather than the man; for as long as firearms and the like remain in the picture men will be 'taken out' of it. RELATED INFO: Just Facts: A Resource for Independent Thinkers
In my opinion it seems we need a sobering dose of objectivity. In order to think clearly upon the issue we have to be logical and suppress our individual biases not excluding "My Four Fathers told me so". It is not meaning to undermine or disregard The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution but rather an attempt to see the gun control monster for what it really is. Therefore, it isn't necessary to factor in belief systems, laws, and ideals that inhibit objectivity by veiling the bottom line. I figure if we are to be truly honest with ourselves we must fully understand the raw nature of guns [and people for that matter] -- meaning, the concept behind guns and there functional purpose by definition as well the human psychology in relation to weapons. Once that happens it's easy to deduce the MOST logical solution to gun violence.
The world is filled with violence. Because criminals carry guns, we decent law-abiding citizens should also have guns. Otherwise they will win and the decent people will lose.
--James Earl Jones
