Gun rabies

Conservatives have gone off the deep end regarding gun control. At one point, most supported ideas like not letting people who had violent histories or mental illnesses that in some way or another impair their ability to differentiate between right and wrong own guns. However as of late, this is not the case. Do not impede the criminal's right to bear arms they say. Don't stop the guy who has more voices in his head than the Wu Tang Clan from getting a gun that can fire 100 bullets in 15 seconds. After all, he might need that to go hunting they say (because sometimes you just need to turn the deer into hamburger on site I guess). Don't you dare do any background checks. They'll just get their guns some other way on the black market they say. 

Ladies and gents I'm first to admit I'm pro Second Amendment but like every other Amendment there are limits. Making bomb threats is not free speech and human sacrifice is not valid religious practice so certainly there are limits on the Second Amendment. Limits like “if you've proven that you flat out won't control your actions or that you are incapable of understanding the physical, moral and social ramifications of your actions, you shouldn't have a gun.”

Most people find such an idea reasonable. After all, proving that you don't care about the rights of others or simply don't understand the idea that other people actually have rights, such as the right to walk into a movie theater and not leave with bullets in all their organs, kind of disqualifies you as a “responsible gun owner.” But to some people, this isn't the case. According to them, anyone should be able to waltz into any gun store at any time they wish, buy as many guns and bullets as they wish and waltz back out armed to the teeth, with no questions asked about mental stability, gang affiliation, drug abuse, or criminal history. To call these types pro-gun would be inaccurate. What we're looking at is “gun rabies.”

Gun rabies is this idea that everyone should be allowed to have any kind of gun no matter how powerful the gun is or how screwed up the buyer is. This idea used to only be tossed around in the most radical circles but gained steam when the President became a photo negative of all the others. As much as I hate to bring race into anything (largely because it just degenerates into accusations of racism from everyone) , it's true. Enforcing regulations already in place in lieu of making new ones was once the battle cry from pro-gun conservatives. Now, the battle cry is shred any and all regulations no matter how reasonable. This change is in part due to the election of President Obama and the rise of so-called militias. Apparently, they think gang members and the mentally unstable would be inclined to join them in an armed uprising against the government rather than do what gang members and psychos are more inclined to do in such situations.

Their justification is that banning guns for people who can't or won't control themselves was never specifically mentioned in the Constitution so we shouldn't do it. Still no consistent word from these types on the War on Drugs or using our military to interfere in other countries internal conflicts, which also fail the “specific mention” test though. Funny how that works.

They claim that guns aren't the problem. We have significant social problems and no amount of gun bans or taxes or regulations will stop gun violence. The social problems have to be addressed.

The weird part is, they're right. They are entirely right. You can talk about banning guns all you want but you'll never get anywhere unless you do something about the people pulling the trigger.

So do they advocate fixing our mental health system and making treatment easier to get for people with mental illness who tend to be the ones who go on the murder sprees? No because that would be socialism. Do they advocate overhauling our education system and making it easier to obtain in light of the fact that most of the people committing gun crimes are uneducated and the other fact that people who are educated are far less likely to commit crimes? No that would also be socialism. What about making it easier for a person to turn his life around after he gets out of jail? Do something tp expunging a criminal record easier for a guy who wants to get on the straight and narrow so he can provide for himself (and thus, far less likely to commit a gun crime or any crime for that matter)? Anyone who suggests that better be ready for the “law and order” types to yowl so loud it would be heard from outer space. Do they advocate finally dropping the Drug War, thus taking power away from the street gangs that commit large portions of gun crime? The law and order crowd would scream.

Well since they reject the obvious solutions what do they suggest? Brace yourself for this one (and by that I mean get some high quality booze): School prayer. Yes their only real “solution” is Miss Jenkins leading her first grade class in school prayer. If only we prayed in schools, there would be less crime. After all, it worked in the 50s and there was less crime then so that must be the solution right?

Ignoring the fact that most of these people making this stupid comment weren't even born, or at best not even out of diapers, there were a lot of other things that were different in the 50s. When a person got out of jail it was much easier for him to start over. We didn't cry socialism every time someone suggested investing in our people and infrastructure. We invested in our mental healthcare (imperfect though it was) instead of just throwing them on the street to save money. Yet none of them want to go back to that. I suppose it's easier to pray than actually do anything productive about the problem. But then rabies does impair judgment. Perhaps gun rabies does the same.