Follow up thoughts on gun control
I’ll be honest. I don’t really get guns. It’s one of those issues I can fully engage—because I don’t understand why it’s so important to many people. I get the gun control side. But the other side is a bit trickier for me to weigh. The first day of hunting season is an unofficial holiday season in Michigan, so it’s clearly a big deal. So my general approach would be to let people have whatever they need to hunt with and do a pretty solid job of locking the rest of it down. Our freely-available guns are supplying a de facto civil war in Mexico, and we really ought to do something about that.
Deadly Almonds writes:
I think the main reason people feel the need for guns is to to defend themselves from people who may have guns
I think that’s largely true—and I also think that as soon as we open a cross-fire, we increase the chances of somebody getting hurt.
It would be great if we can crack down on overall manufacturing of small arms and ammunition. There is an overwhelming quantity available which only breeds violence.
Automatic weapons are largely impossible to acquire anyway. The only legal ones for civilians must’ve been registered by 1986, and cost multiple thousands of dollars.
Oh. So … I don’t really know about guns. I should have skipped this topic. But, whatever.
Jennifer Getting There writes:
Holy crap, you were not joking about #alienating readers. :)
Then Diggberals wrote this thing about how we need to engage in a violent insurrection against the government. That’s actually one of the reasons I’d be happy to take guns off the street. I have some issues with our government. I have some changes I would make. But … I’m not inclined to shoot at police officers. And I’d really rather you avoided shooting at police officers, no matter how good an idea it seems at the time. The suckiness of everything policy I’ve ever complained about is pretty minimal compared to the suckiness of a literal civil war.
It’s not worth it.