Color me skeptical that the Democrats can do much in the current political situation - their margins in Congress are razor thin and rely on a fair number of Democrats from gun friendly states like West Virginia. But we're hearing the usual banging of the gun control drum, so it's time to dust this 4 year old post off. I mean, it's on the right hand side bar for your convenience, but some things need to be said again, and again.
(originally posted March 2, 2018)
I confess. I'm not opposed to gun control.
Confession, they say, is good for the soul, so I confess. Man, I feel better all ready.
I don't object to gun control. What I object to is stupid and useless gun control.
Unfortunately, all we seem to hear are stupid and useless gun control proposals. As a public service, here are two simple rules you can use to figure out whether a gun control proposal is stupid and useless:
Rule #1. Can the person proposing the law state what they think the law will accomplish? Most of the time it seems that they can't. For example, what good would banning bump stocks do? They were (maybe) used in one crime in the Republic's history. Is the goal really to prevent something that has only happened once? Really?
Rule #2. Can the person proposing the law state how likely the law is to accomplish the goal from Rule #1? Considering that you can make a bump stock from a string and a key ring, is it rational to ban bump stocks?
That's it - two simple rules to identify non-stupid and non-useless gun control laws. So let's use these rules to look at some gun control laws and see if they're stupid or not:
1994 Assault Weapons Ban. Stupid. The law was supposed to stop people from buying military style semi-automatic rifles. It didn't. The AR platform is likely the most popular rifle in America, and was so during the "ban". The Department of Justice said that the ban had precisely zero effect on gun crime.
Gun Free School Zones. Stupid. It was supposed to stop people from taking guns into schools. That sure worked great, didn't it?
I could go on with this, but you can add your own. My point, though, is that the gun control proposals (magazine size restrictions, one gun a month purchase limits, etc.) are stupid and useless. I'm willing to leave open the possibility that some gun control proposals could be non-stupid, at least in theory. But I sure haven't seen any yet.
UPDATE 2 March 2018 12:45: This line of reasoning continues in a second post.
I don't object to gun control. What I object to is stupid and useless gun control.
Unfortunately, all we seem to hear are stupid and useless gun control proposals. As a public service, here are two simple rules you can use to figure out whether a gun control proposal is stupid and useless:
Rule #1. Can the person proposing the law state what they think the law will accomplish? Most of the time it seems that they can't. For example, what good would banning bump stocks do? They were (maybe) used in one crime in the Republic's history. Is the goal really to prevent something that has only happened once? Really?
Rule #2. Can the person proposing the law state how likely the law is to accomplish the goal from Rule #1? Considering that you can make a bump stock from a string and a key ring, is it rational to ban bump stocks?
That's it - two simple rules to identify non-stupid and non-useless gun control laws. So let's use these rules to look at some gun control laws and see if they're stupid or not:
1994 Assault Weapons Ban. Stupid. The law was supposed to stop people from buying military style semi-automatic rifles. It didn't. The AR platform is likely the most popular rifle in America, and was so during the "ban". The Department of Justice said that the ban had precisely zero effect on gun crime.
Gun Free School Zones. Stupid. It was supposed to stop people from taking guns into schools. That sure worked great, didn't it?
I could go on with this, but you can add your own. My point, though, is that the gun control proposals (magazine size restrictions, one gun a month purchase limits, etc.) are stupid and useless. I'm willing to leave open the possibility that some gun control proposals could be non-stupid, at least in theory. But I sure haven't seen any yet.
UPDATE 2 March 2018 12:45: This line of reasoning continues in a second post.
When someone whose agenda is "end private ownership of firearms" proposes a "gun control" law, the law is intended as a step to the elimination of the private ownership of firearms. Even if it is not a "stupid and useless" law; even if someone who only dislikes stupid and useless gun control can support the law.
ReplyDeleteWith the Left, the "issue" is never the issue. The issue is the Revolution.
Maybe there needs to be a Rule #3: Does my supporting this law (because I think the law may actually do some good) increase the power of the Left? If it does, does the law do something so vital that that's worth it?
I had an interesting discussion last week with a Uni student. He's going to Oxford. The elite UK unis are not quite as rotted out as Harvard and Yale, so he was able to carry on a thoughtful line of reasoning.
ReplyDeleteHe said that they can't understand why we can't "do something". My counter points parallel yours. We sure can do things but will they have any net positive result? There are too many firearms in circulation to reduce their numbers in several lifetimes. The technology has evolved. Ban high capacity mags? Fire up the 3D printer. And of course there are other ways to horrifically kill innocent people.
It's been on my mind.
You might raise the age of any firearm purchase to 21. It's been a long time since we had a generation you could send to boot camp, issue an M1 and expect them to storm Omaha Beach. They are now, collectively, dummies who should not be trusted with sharp sticks.
You stray into dangerous territory, but putting a one hour delay in any social media live streaming might close off one of the sick paths to recognition. Let them know they will die a death as lonely and without glory as their life was.
It comes down to the culture. What brakes were there in former times? I mean, you could once order handguns in the Monkey Wards catalog. Special ones designed for aimless lads who wanted to plink gophers. Something existed then that is now lost. Becoming a secular society has something to do with it. Religious nuts have always been at some risk of killing infidels, but for most people the concept of good and evil, of heaven and hell had some heft.
I suppose we could start by emphatically enforcing the laws we do have on the books, and in issuing sentences that are not warped and diluted by equity considerations. We'll have to build more jails.
T
Tacitus, in his ‘culture’ paragraph, nails it. When a was a young-un, daily prayer in school was the norm. Along with that, the family unit was basically intact, & kids learned morality (for lack of a better word) at home, & it was reinforced in school.
ReplyDeletePrior to the GCA of 1968, guns were readily available in the mail (!), yet mass shootings were a rarity (main exception in Texas in ‘66).
Prayer in school ended c.1963, GCA began in ‘68… any correlation there? Indeed, “Heaven & Hell had some heft”.
Third rule of sane Gun Control legislation:
ReplyDelete(oxymoron for ALL politicians these days)
Any Politician who writes, advocates for, votes for, or fails to stop legislation that will take or hinder the Second Amendment rights of ANY Law Abiding American Citizens...
WILL be FORBIDDEN from owning, having access to or even being within 100 feet of ANY firearm that includes any and ALL security provided or assigned to them.
MSG Grumpy
Gun Control has NEVER led their agenda. It is the NUMBER ONE GOAL of the criminal left because successful implementation of it grants them unlimited, unfettered total control over everything and everyone. And anyone saying "I support the Second Amendment, but" DOESN'T.
ReplyDeleteThey have Mitch McConnell and his minions. Since McConnell has pledged to drive MAGA types out of the party, gun control would be a useful tool.
ReplyDeleteGun control and registries should never pass “GO”.
ReplyDeleteGiven the incremental legislation and volatility of politics today, and the integrity our ruling class…? If you vote for any gun control today…what will it become a year from now? 5 years from now? 10? The leaders you elect today will nor be the one you have 10 years from now. That’s why your first and second amendment were riveted, bolted and welded into your founding documents. When Biden says “the 2nd Amendment isn’t absolute…”, we’ll…yes it is you senile douche bag, and if you mess with it, you mess with the others too! And be prepared to fight and die for it too.