Massacre
I know my 2nd Amend friends will disapprove, but once again, on the heels of the Tree of Life slaughter, I call, once again, for control of assault weapons. This is insanity.
Ordinary citizens cannot buy rocket or grenade launchers. Weapons of mass destruction can, and should, be off the market. Will people still acquire them? Of course. Will the proliferation of them be stanched? Fair question, as there are a ton of them out there right now.
But by what logic would we add to the the population? We can stop allowing them to be legally purchased, which will cause manufacturers to stop making them. Not entirely, for sure. Not when there's a buck to be made. But restricting sales to military and law enforcement, can we do that? Of course we can. Are there makers of cruise missiles out there? Are they making money?
Please.
Can a 17-year-old buy a beer? Of course. Should we make it easy for him or her? I think not.
Can a wacko buy an AR17? Of course. Should we make it easy for him or her? Some argue no, because people are afraid that that's just the first step, that before long we'll be knockin' on their door for that 30.06 and shotgun and whatnot.
We know that people have feared the gummint since, well, gummint. I myself am a Kentucky guy, and the revenooers are a part of my hate heritage. So I get that.
But, your right to yell fire, your right of free speech, ends when, in fact, there is no fire.
Your right to shoot weapons of mass destruction ends when you leave military service.
Or maybe we should institute a severance gift for vets. Their choice: tank, flamethrower, or assault rifle. Hell, they had the training, right? You'd want that on your side, when the gummint comes to take your stuff, am I right?
Of course, that's never happened in 200 years, but ya never know. Oh, there's eminent domain, but shoot, that's only been used when we want to run a freeway through the poor part of town.
Sorry, that's a whole 'nother rant.
Ordinary citizens cannot buy rocket or grenade launchers. Weapons of mass destruction can, and should, be off the market. Will people still acquire them? Of course. Will the proliferation of them be stanched? Fair question, as there are a ton of them out there right now.
But by what logic would we add to the the population? We can stop allowing them to be legally purchased, which will cause manufacturers to stop making them. Not entirely, for sure. Not when there's a buck to be made. But restricting sales to military and law enforcement, can we do that? Of course we can. Are there makers of cruise missiles out there? Are they making money?
Please.
Can a 17-year-old buy a beer? Of course. Should we make it easy for him or her? I think not.
Can a wacko buy an AR17? Of course. Should we make it easy for him or her? Some argue no, because people are afraid that that's just the first step, that before long we'll be knockin' on their door for that 30.06 and shotgun and whatnot.
We know that people have feared the gummint since, well, gummint. I myself am a Kentucky guy, and the revenooers are a part of my hate heritage. So I get that.
But, your right to yell fire, your right of free speech, ends when, in fact, there is no fire.
Your right to shoot weapons of mass destruction ends when you leave military service.
Or maybe we should institute a severance gift for vets. Their choice: tank, flamethrower, or assault rifle. Hell, they had the training, right? You'd want that on your side, when the gummint comes to take your stuff, am I right?
Of course, that's never happened in 200 years, but ya never know. Oh, there's eminent domain, but shoot, that's only been used when we want to run a freeway through the poor part of town.
Sorry, that's a whole 'nother rant.
Comments