I’m a firearms addict. I freely discussed this in a previous post (Gun Jones). And most of my adult life, I’ve held moderately-paying or even low paying jobs. But, I almost always fed my Jones. Sometimes was financially irresponsible in so doing.
Part of this was my addictive personality; part my having been but a callow youth.
But, as an adult lurching forward (see previous post) into the so-called ‘Golden Years’, on medical disability, I must say: I can no longer afford to purchase firearms. I must pay rent and purchase food. First. Depending on which agency defines it, I’m on the cusp of the poverty level.
Fortunately, I’ve two fine guns. The last one was purchased in 1995.
The Armed Lutheran got me to thinking of this, as he addresses the President’s recent remarks about wanting more
gun people control. A snippet:
“And so what I’m trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced, but part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence, because frankly, in my hometown of Chicago, there’s an awful lot of violence, and they’re not using AK-47s, they’re using cheap handguns.”
The president’s comments in the debate, to me, indicate just another misunderstanding of human nature. Like his incessant desire to tax the “rich” and give to the “poor”, thinking those policies will have no effect on human behavior, the idea that the cost of guns is what drives crime is extremely flawed. If only guns cost more, criminals would not use guns in crimes. Right. As if criminals are so cost conscious. If we get rid of cheap guns, only affluent criminals can afford them, I guess.
The real problem with the idea of banning “cheap” guns is the effect it has on self defense. Most victims of crime in inner cities fit into a specific demographic. Low income, mostly minority, many on government assistance, like housing. The cost of a Glock, a Sig, or an H&K is simply beyond these citizens. Laugh, though we might, at the Hi-Points, Cobras, Ravens, Lorcins, and Jiminez pistols these guns are often the only affordable option for home and self-defense for those trapped in low-income housing in the inner city. The impoverished, law-abiding citizens in these situations will be denied the ability to defend themselves if you ban “cheap” guns. As with all gun control, such a ban would leave these poor souls without protection in the name of protecting them from gun violence. It would leave them vulnerable, and defenseless.
I still cannot afford even a Hi-Point. Guess I’m one of the lucky ones…