Everyone knows by now about the Boston Marathon bombings and the subsequent aftermath. Despite the tragedy, it is nice to see people standing up together instead of fighting for a change.
Having said that, I’ve seen a disturbing trend in the last few years. It is very likely it existed long before I noticed it, but now it’s all I can see. I am talking about select people’s need to use current events to further their own goals. In this case specifically, I am referring to the connection people are making to the Boston Marathon bombings and America’s gun control laws.
These two things have absolutely nothing to do with one another, and yet I’ve seen dozens of posts, memes, images, and articles proudly displaying that there would be no fear for citizen’s armed with assault rifles. Good job, you’re retarded.
Why, you ask? Let me count the ways.
1.) Just because a person owns a gun doesn’t mean they know how to use it.
2.) A person filled with fear is far more likely to have an itchy trigger finger, which would cause more problems in this case, not get results.
3.) You can’t cry about your constitutional rights to own firearms while simultaneously saying the suspect(s) should be shot on sight.
Now to drift away from the subject of Boston and focus solely on gun ownership in America from my point of view.
There are very, very few people I know that I would trust with a gun. By that statement you may assume that there are many people I would not trust with a gun, and you would be correct. The problem is that a lot of gun owners I know fall squarely into the second category. If you want a gun, I don’t care. Go for it. Just learn how to use it. Learn everything about it. If you don’t know every single piece and their functions, you have no business owning that weapon.
Why do you want to own military-grade weapons? “Home defense”? A pistol can do that, arguably much more effectively due to its smaller size. Because you’re “a collector”? I get that, I really do, but if you choose to be a gun collector then you should be fully aware of how dangerous these guns are and act accordingly, i.e. not keeping a loaded AR-15 in your hands on the off-chance a terrorist walks into your house (see point 2 above).
What it really seems to come down to is that they’re cool, and I won’t argue with that. Guns are cool, Hollywood has been pounding that into my head for decades. They’re also fun to shoot, they give quite the adrenaline rush, and their wide array of types makes them a hell of a hobby. But you know what else is cool? Hm. Smoking, perhaps?
Yes, that seems fitting. You tie your constitutional rights to a bombing attack, and I shall compare the girth of your hard-on for guns with my disgusting black lungs. Each topic is about as closely related to each other, I think.
The only real problem in my opinion is that imposing restrictions on these kinds of guns would make it way too easy to further encroach on a citizen’s rights and eventually be able to not only disarm the entire population, but also tell us exactly what we can or cannot have. It’ll be like that scene in Demolition Man where Sandra Bullock explains what the government has made illegal: “smoking is not good for you, and it’s been deemed that anything not good for you is bad; hence, illegal. Alcohol, caffeine, contact sports, meat […] bad language, chocolate, gasoline, uneducational toys and anything spicy.” It may sound far-fetched, but it looks like we’re already taking steps toward a parallel future.
In the meantime, learn how to take those “Like if U Agree!” banners and shove them up your ass. Clicking that button is not an act of supporting your own rights, it’s just feeding into the ego of some anonymous asshole that has no say in the matter at hand and only wants to win some sort of faux popularity test.