I posted this originally on Facebook, but wanted to share it here. This article from the New York Times talks about one small town’s struggle with the legal but frightening increase in the use of semi-automatic rifles (SARs). The troubling and reoccurring theme I am seeing on Facebook and other sites is the use of freedom as a defense to continue to allow people to own SARs. These guns weren’t allowed until a few years ago, but now people see any restriction on them as an attempt to take away gun ownership from all Americans and an attack on the 2nd Amendment. I think that’s a crock. Anyway, here’s what I wrote.
“He said he was distraught at the school massacre but said guns should not be made the ‘scapegoat.’ Guns are why we’re free in this country, and people lose sight of that when tragedies like this happen,” he said. “A gun didn’t kill all those children, a disturbed man killed all those children.” ~(Excerpt from this article which I encourage you to read)
No… a disturbed man with a semi-automatic rifle and bullet-proof vest killed all those children.
Listen this isn’t really a debate. I know friends who have these guns (semi-auto rifles) – and they don’t need them – they want them. Big difference!! Our country is full of examples of the limitations of our freedoms being established to protect us from ourselves. Guns don’t make us “free” – especially these types of guns… that’s a ridiculous backwoods ignorant argument.
“But the bad guys have them and we need to defend ourselves”, they argue. This kid was not a bad guy, he was a very troubled person who had easy access to these weapons. This isn’t a situation where it’s a drug war, or gangs or the mafia. This was one person who, because of his easy access to these types of weapons, was able to inflict incredible amounts of carnage in a very short period of time.