Salvete. I'm Trygve Plaustrum, here with some more conservative discussion.
Let me be honest. The closest thing that I have to a gun is an Airsoft rifle. I know very, very little about the mechanisms of rifles, handguns, or (Biden's favorite) shotguns. I do know that they are weapons designed to effectively injure or kill intruders (or potentially victims). That is all that I need to make this case.
Before I begin the bulk of my argument, I would like to state that the mass shootings of the past (most notably Sandy Hook) have little to no basis in this argument. Unfortunately, I must agree with Joseph Stalin when he says, "One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic" (quote taken from http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/joseph_stalin.html). Honestly, in comparison to the hundreds if not thousands of deaths coming each day via smoking, cancer, alcohol, abortion, and car accidents, do massacres like Sandy Hook have any weight?
While I am on the topic of Sandy Hook,
To Whom It Concerns: Do not wave our children around in the argument for gun control (or, really, any argument). Both conservatives and liberals talk about our nation's children far too often. The argument is fallacious, overly emotional, and illogical. Should I care any more about a death because it was the death of a child? If a program is inefficient and corrupted, is it adoptable if suddenly children are involved? This generation will make its own decisions and hold its own opinions, the generation after this one will make its own decisions and hold its own opinions, et cetera. Our children will become adults someday and be able to look after themselves. Do not worry about our children. If the government leaves our children alone, our children will do just fine. Let us worry about this generation for now.
Our founding fathers probably never considered mass shootings like the one at Sandy Hook (apologies for not mentioning others like Columbine, but Sandy Hook was one of the more recent and well-known mass shootings). Our founding fathers installed the right to bear arms in the Constitution in order to make sure that no American administration would be without a leash. The Continental Army was underfunded, outnumbered, and divided, but the Continental Army particularly was outgunned. The Framers knew the importance of arms of any shape and size and knew that the more efficient and advanced the weapon was, the better (from http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/g/george_washington.html, "Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty teeth"). Knowing this, they ensured that each citizen would be able to have what they need to keep the government under control. Should a government become tyrannical, the American citizens could "pull a Jefferson," secede (hint), and potentially overthrow the government or establish a new one . Shootings were not even in the equation (although guns are definitely helpful in defense). Also, the United States government was very much against a large standing army. The people, then, were the ultimate American defense. Militia were critical in the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, and the Civil War.
Stay tuned for Part 2. Subscribe and have a nice day.
No comments:
Post a Comment