Fscking a f**king idiot: Opinion: Guns don’t kill people: Really?
Let’s take this a point at a time:
“From time to time, I take my life in my own hands and write a column that I know lots of people will not like. This is one of those times.”
I know the sensation. Why, once when an individual in an online forum repeatedly posted television show ‘spoilers’ and I asked him to use the designated ‘Spoilers’ section, he threatened to kill me. Oddly enough, he changed his mind upon learning I’m armed and trained. Go figure.
“The headlines in Milwaukee say homicides are up 80 percent. In Chicago they are up 23 percent.”
And in the nation overall, violent crime is at a 40 year low. What’s your point again?
“The fact that more than 30,000 people were killed by guns in this country last year…”
Correction: Killed by people with firearms. Unless you’ve fielded an autonomous robotic firearm, guns are inanimate objects. Some person has to draw and point the weapon, and pull its trigger. I will grant the exceptional case of a police officer who stupidly carried his gun into an MRI room, where the magnetic field grabbed it and caused to fire. But an external force was still required to fire the inanimate object.
You might also take note that two-thirds of those firearms deaths are suicide. A recent study of two states that changed guns laws (one more liberal, one more restrictive) found that while the rate of gun suicides went down in the restrictive state, the rate of total suicides remained constant; they just didn’t use guns. People determined to die by their own hands will find a way. (The liberalizing state saw little change in the rate of firearms suicide.)
“… and that a gun in the home is four times as likely to kill a family member as an intruder are statistics we should ponder.”
Ah,the debunked — and retracted — Kellerman study still ‘lives’ on as zombie science. Next you’ll be quoting the debunked MDA ‘studies.’
“Some of our citizens believe that the Second Amendment to the Constitution that guarantees the right to own a gun was written so the population could protect itself against a tyrannical government. I used to teach government, so I am very familiar with the Second Amendment and know why it was included by patriot George Mason IV, who wrote it, and George Washington, who strongly supported it.”
Possibly you should have learned history instead of ‘government.’Then you might have read the Federalist Papers and learned that folks like Madison also saw an armed populace could resist a tyrannical government unlike those disarmed in European countries at the time.
“An American who needs a gun to make war on his government must be contemplating another Civil War.”
Or perhaps that armed person is wondering if the governments that employ California detectives who threaten on Facebook to kill civilians, Ohio officers who sit in donut shops and discuss killing unarmed civilians, police and military who unlawfully and unconstitutionally disarm New Orleans residents (including beating up a 60ish old lady), Ohio cops who fire 130 rounds at an unarmed couple, another Ohio (what is it with Ohio cops?) who threatened to kill a driver on camera, or military personnel who stated their willingness to forcibly disarm Americans when formally surveyed, the ATF who deliberately armed international criminals…
Perhaps that armed citizen thinks just maybe that sort of government is considering making war on us.
“Having a hunting rifle is one thing, but no one should be allowed to justify possession of hugely powerful guns that can massacre a crowd of movie goers…”
‘Hugely powerful?’ The 5.56 NATO/.223 Remington round is so much less powerful than most ‘hunting rifles’ that it isn’t even allowed for deer hunting in some jurisdictions. If you’re banning weapons based on cartridge power, you’ll have to start with hunters’ weapons. Just call them ‘sniper guns’ like that idiot Feinstein.
“What are certain kinds of guns but killing machines designed to kill people?”
Firearms are chemical/mechanical devices designed to direct a projectile at a target. That’s all. The person using it determines the target and the reason. It may be at a deer for food, a paper target for fun, a violent criminal for defense. Sadly, violent criminals do exist, which is an argument for honest people to have proper defensive tools.
I wanted to post this in comments to Hopkins column, but they require you to register with them. I found a ‘Fact Check’ button, but that form requires you give them a phone number. I plugged in a fake number and told them I would not accept calls unless/until they coordinated by email first.
The firstname.lastname@example.org email address? Bounces. So I guess he knows he’s full of shit, and enjoys being constipated.