you're reading...
anti-gun, death, evil, fascism, gun control, libertarianism, personal responsibility, sad

There ought to be ANOTHER law – NOT!

As completely expected, after the theater shooting tragedy, there has been a call from some circles (The Brady Bunch, Mayors Against Illegal Guns Gun Ownership and others, for yet more gun control.

This is not surprising, even when the political element is removed from the outcry.  People question why, and want something done to keep this from happening in the future.  It should never happen to anyone.  But, generally I don’t appeal to the government to solve problems.  They’re inefficient and incompetent.  And usually have a different agenda.

I guess I’m disconnected from this kind of thinking.  There ought to be a law is not something in my normal reaction lexicon.  I’m a libertarian, small ‘L’.  I was, even before I knew there was such a word.  I’ve an extreme aversion to the word ‘ban’.  Even if it is regarding something for which I lack fondness.  Drug abuse comes to mind.

Hey, it’s your body (they tell us).

If you want to believe ‘X’, go ahead, feel free.  Go for it.  As long as ‘X’ doesn’t interfere with MY RIGHTS.  Or anyone else’s.

If you don’t like guns, don’t own one.  But telling others they shouldn’t be able to exercise their rights in this matter is repugnant.  And against the American tradition.

Regular readers of this blog know I lost my daughter in an automobile accident in 1995.  She was 12.  We were t-boned at a major intersection by a guy driving a GM car in excess of 70 miles per hour, who ran the light.

After I got out of the hospital, I didn’t immediately call for the banning of drivers, owners of GM cars or even GM cars.  The guy was speeding to get to work, and didn’t do it intentionally, but even if he had been some nutjob trying to hit us on purpose, it would have made no sense to ban GM cars.  Or any cars.

Millions of people in the United States legally own and use firearms, and keep them for self-protection, sport, hunting, and the enjoyment of ownership of a fine tool.  They don’t go shooting up theaters or committing heinous acts with them.

It’s irrational and illogical to demand more control of the law-abiding citizenry.  Let’s try holding criminals responsible for their acts, instead.


About guffaw1952

I'm a child of the 50's. libertarian, now medically-retired. I've been a certified firearms trainer, a private investigator, and worked for a major credit card company for almost 22 years. I am a proud NRA Life Member. I am a limited-government, free-market capitalist, who believes in the U.S. Constitution and the Rule of Law.


6 thoughts on “There ought to be ANOTHER law – NOT!

  1. Anyone who is willing to violate the laws against murder and assault is not going to be impressed with laws against the tools he chooses to use in that much greater violation.

    Some commenter somewhere (I lost track long ago) was mewling that the slaughter in Aurora was gun owner’s fault because they were not willing to be inconvenienced by a few check marks on paper to prevent all this. The idea that more paperwork, more “laws,” and generally disarming more potential victims is going to prevent monsters from plotting evil and murdering them is incredible. How can anyone be so dumb?

    And, the really sickening thing to me is that not one single soul (far as I can determine so far) made ANY attempt whatsoever to resist the shooter in that theater. NOT ONE – armed or otherwise. Now that’s shameful.

    Posted by MamaLiberty | July 22, 2012, 9:14 am
  2. Occasionally John McCain doesn’t irritate me and I agree with him on something – he has pointed out just how much good Norway’s strict gun control laws worked when Anders Brievik want to go on a rampage.

    Posted by ProudHillbilly | July 22, 2012, 1:14 pm
  3. I must respectfully disagree with MamaLiberty on this point: it is not advisable to return fire in a dark movie theater. In fact, it’s a nightmare scenario if ever there was one. Depending on the angle, you might be clearly visible to the bad guy due to the light reflecting off the screen, whereas he might be visible to you only as a shadow or silouette, the bad guy can direct continuous fire in your direction because he is not mindful of collateral damage, whereas you (being a moral person) have to be careful not to shoot all the people jumping up out of their chairs and running around between you and the bad guy. You could end up killing as many innocent bystanders as the bad guy.

    Posted by Gregory Brown | July 22, 2012, 3:56 pm
    • Greg – we weren’t there, so we cannot assess the specifics. But, given the idea that someone is an active shooter against many persons, responding to the shooter either with a firearm or en masse is not out-of-the-question. Obviously, one’s skill does enter into it. If they follow the Four Rules (see the sidebar) collateral damage would be minimized.
      Skilled persons do not shoot at shadows.

      Posted by guffaw1952 | July 22, 2012, 9:52 pm
  4. Greg, you are perfectly free to follow your own advice and die, watching many around you die as well. If you require some sort of guarantee of success and total freedom from any potential liability, you might as well go lock yourself in a padded room. You won’t do well in real life that way.

    The truth is that he had ZERO opposition! Fewer people in that theater would have died if the folks in the front rows had just rushed him with their bare hands,. Yes, some of them would have died too… as they did anyway. But the criminal shooter would have been stopped by the sheer numbers even if he didn’t cut and run – which is more likely. But these folks were carefully conditioned all of their lives not to take any responsibility for themselves and were truly, and tragically, unarmed and very helpless victims.

    Could one armed person have turned the tide and stopped it? Who knows? I sure don’t. The fact was that nobody – out of however many were in that room – even tried.

    It will be very interesting to learn – if we ever do learn – just what really happened and who this shooter is… because none of the story so far makes much sense.

    Posted by MamaLiberty | July 23, 2012, 4:33 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

"Round up the usual suspects."

In Loving Memory…

%d bloggers like this: