This whole mess is nothing more than a jumble of half-truths, outright lies, statistics with zero…

Angry little liberal… interesting choice of words.

I appreciate your response, this is one of the reasons I started this blog in the first place. This is obviously something you feel very strongly about so I will try to address all of what you’ve said. First of all, it is my opinion that if you cannot properly handle your own financial matters, buying a gun should be pretty far down on your list of priorities. It is my opinion that this is a disqualifier for being able to buy a gun. I can’t think of a good reason why someone in this situation would need or want a gun.

Second, I never called for a prohibition on guns, personally I think they should be banned but I never argued that in my post. I brought up prohibition only to demonstrate that amendments can be changed and have been changed in the past.

Third, you are correct, I spoke in an absolute, again it is my opinion, however, the fact that gun laws need to be changed is up for debate.

Fourth, if you are on the FBI watch list there is a reason for it. They do not put people on it indiscriminately. Being on this list should prevent you from buying and owning a gun.

Fifth, Obama by his own admission, never wanted to take away your guns, he wanted greater regulations and stricter laws, something that I think is pretty reasonable given the power that firearms have.

Sixth, I can’t speak for any of your friends or family that now like guns, good for you I guess. Do they think that assault rifles are necessary for protection? Do they think that extended clips are needed to bag that deer you’re hunting?

Seventh, how do universal background checks infringe on anyone’s rights? How are mandatory waiting periods preventing anyone from practicing their 2nd amendment rights? What is the harm in making it a little tougher for someone to get their hands on a tool that can kill people? Like I say in the post, maybe these measures won’t work but what is the harm in trying them?

Eighth, yes I can blame them for not wanting to open up a discourse. As I think I am proving, I am perfectly happy to discuss this issue as it is one I feel very strongly about. By no means does this put the argument that the 2nd amendment is dated to bed. I am not saying that you fall into this category but in my experience people cry 2nd amendment whenever anyone brings up limiting access to guns. D.C. vs. Heller allowed for the use of guns in self-defense situations, as did Caetano vs. Massachusetts. As I said I think that keeping a gun for self-defense is dumb but I never said that this should not be allowed. My argument is for stricter gun laws and for limiting what guns people can and can’t buy. No one needs an assault rifle to defend against an intruder.

I am going to assume for the sake of brevity that you are a responsible gun owner. Again I have not said that guns should be banned, that is only my opinion, however, as a responsible gun owner you should be one of the first to want stricter gun laws.

I have done my best to address your concerns, for lack of a better word, without citing prior shootings as that is manipulative and not fair, and again when I said “gun laws need to be changed, that is not up for debate” I misspoke and stated my opinion. But the fact of the matter is, despite the fact that most people who own guns use them properly, the laws are made for the 1% that do not and this is why stricter gun laws need to be considered and debated. That 1% reflects badly on you as a responsible gun owner and on me as a citizen of a country that refuses to take the proper steps in preventing future mass shootings, despite accounting for 1/3 of all mass shootings that take place around the world.


Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated Evil Ocean’s story.