Why gun control is BS

Dang...random violence is scary.

 

I H8 on gun control. Its right in the constitution, and almost every state constitution says its for what its supposed to be. The public is supposed to beable to defend its self from the government. It is supposed to beable to compete with the US Military so that if it were to become corupt the public would have at least some abilty to defend its self.

 

That's f***ed up. What has to be going through a person's head for the act of stabbing a random eight-year-old to even occur to them, let alone seem like a good idea?

Agreed. Hell, I've lived most of my life in places where you pretty much need to have some sort of firearm handy (I wouldn't want to try to get a cornered porcupine out of my attic or clear out poisonous snakes without one).

This isn't actually the purpose of the 2nd Amendment (not that it isn't necessarily a valid reason to own guns, it just isn't the stated purpose of the amendment). The 2nd amendment reads:

"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."

The purpose isn't for the public to compete with the US Military, the purpose is for the public to be the US Military. The Militia Act of 1792 reads:

"That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, ... every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock..."

This made a lot of sense in the late 18th century, when invasion of the mainland US was a recent occurrence, and a distinct possibility of a repeat occurrence existed. It makes just as much, if not more, sense today. We're a global power today, the only one left, and there are plenty out there who wouldn't mind seeing us taken down a few notches. I live within a few miles of the national border, and it gives me a nice sense of security to know that we're armed to the teeth.

 

Yeah, all of these.

Now, as written, I think the 2nd Amendment is actually a little narrow, as it only covers the ownership of weapons for the purpose of a militia, a "well regulated" militia at that. This opens the door to, say, only allowing ownership of military-appropriate weapons, and requiring military training in their use as a condition of ownership. There's nothing in there that says the government can't ban, to go back to one of my earlier examples, a .22 rifle useful for dusting copperheads. That being said, there's enough precedent supporting a broader interpretation at this point that the amendment functionally exists as it should.

 

Gun control works fairly well up here, only the criminals and cops have them.
That being said, the random acts of violence and crimes of passion are done with knives and bats here. I think it takes more guts to stab or beat a person to death then shoot them. By removing the guns from the equation, the real cowards don't commit the crime.