This debate was settled 225 years ago. Enough already

Last year in Chicago over 700 people, mostly black, were murdered with guns, mostly illegal. The critical mind will appreciate the fact that the events in Vegas, no matter how horrific, are a statistical blip. Fifty-eight people died in one place because of one guy. How is that effectively different from 58 people murdered by 58 people? Dead is dead.

People freaked out about what happened in Sandy Hook. Again, an absolutely horrible thing, but the concern ignored the fact that 663 children died at the hands of their own parents in car trips in 2015. There is no more dangerous place to put your child than in your own car.

So, the argument then goes, “It’s them guns! We gotta get rid of the guns!!” Most of those making those demands are people who never handled one. Maybe never seen one outside of their local cop’s holster. You fear what you you don’t understand, correct?

I find it interesting that this lone-wolf, mass shooter thing is a fairly recent phenomenon. When we had almost no gun laws, this almost never happened. So, why is this happening? That’s what I want to know. I have my theories, and most of them have to do with the increasing pressures placed on (mostly) young males today to prove themselves and their masculinity. Given the loss of “real” jobs that pay real money, you have a lot of idle guys, increasingly frustrated with the world, more and more willing to do violent things to prove themselves. And people think a law is going to fix this?

One manifestation of this is tattoos and piercings — all of this pain inflicted on your own body for what? To impress people? That’s just ONE indication to me that we have some deep-seated sociological problems, many of which are imposed upon us by — that’s right — by bigger government and its control and laws that make men feel, rightly or wrongly, marginalized. The frustration level is off the charts out there. Most of the “progressives” just don’t get it. Just yesterday, I went to a flea market out in Trump country. The signs of it all were in full view, and there wasn’t a single Prius in the parking lot.

Finally, from a constitutional standpoint, we have a right to own guns. Period. You can blab on and on about “militia” and whatever that means, and where’s the missing comma, etc., etc. But the Constitution, as I now understand it, is a document that first tells government what it CAN do. Then the Bill of Rights tells government what it CAN’T do. It then says that it will not take away our guns. The fact that it even mentions guns in that part of the constitution as the SECOND amendment gives you a sense of their priorities, and it means without a doubt to me that the framers had no intention of ever depriving the population of their right to bear arms. Case closed.

In other words, there is no debate about guns. That was settled over 200 years ago, and living under the growing specter of a police state is probably the worst possible time to advocate for stricter gun control.