General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I'm still trying to wrap my head around so many staunchly pro-gun folks on DU [View all]dschmott
(44 posts)It is a simple fact that there are crazy people in the world. And stupid people. And people who lie. And people who make mistakes.
Sure, as long as the guns exist, crazy, angry, power craving folks will find a way to get them. It seems reasonable that we do everything possible to discourage easy access? Sorry to offend some of you folks but is it not kind of crazy, stupid or dishonest to put so much false import into owning weapons that are so easily or accidentally converted into weapons of mass murder?
Is it not true that the folks who own these kind of guns are indeed the ones who generally should not own them? We can make a reasonable exceptions for those in law enforcement/military to possess these types of weapons on the job. But do we really need all the risk that goes along with allowing Adam Lanza's mother and Wayne LaPierre types to have them for target practice purposes?
I'm not a constitutional expert but does this "right to bear arms" really include the right of the gun industry to promote and market very dangerous weapons to a 'gun crazy' population. Sorry if I'm profiling, but is anyone else nervous that the folks you see walking into WalMart are also solicited "weapons of mass murder" in the same aisle as paint ball and bb guns?
What benefit does one person gain (an no a false sense of security does not count), or more importantly how does society benefit by allowing and dare I say actively encourage these weapons to be out there?