Shootings in Alabama, gun control fanatics come up with the usual litany:
“This man needed the firepower of assault weapons to execute his plan of mass carnage. Alabama, and our nation, must take action to make it harder for dangerous people to get dangerous weapons,” said PaulHelmke, President of the Brady Campaign.
I wonder what a “non-assault” weapon would look like? Aside from the inanity of using the term “assault weapon” as if there were any other type, there is the basic folly of gun control, per se. Banning something doesn’t mean you won’t have it anymore, it just means that when someone does/has what is banned, you can put them in jail over it.
In the general sense, none of us particularly care if a criminal has 100 guns stored in his house – we do care if he uses them to commit a crime…and we’re not more offended if he shoots someone with a .45 as opposed to a .38. Heck, we’d be pretty peeved if his weapon of choice was an 18th century dueling pistol. The gun control fanatic turns this on its head – he’s not particularly concerned with the gangster, but very concerned with the guns…but the guns he’s mostly bothering with are those guns not in the hands of gangsters (after all, confiscating a weapon from a law-abiding person is much, much safer than asking a gangster to hand over his firearms).
In practical terms, the main argument against gun control is that it doesn’t work. Here is the latest gun massacre in the Land O’ Gun Control:
The whole of Germany was coming to terms with the tragic killing of pupils and teachers in a school in Winnenden yesterday, after a teen gunman went on a bloody rampage killing 15.
The teen gunman, Tim Kretschmer, went on a shooting spree at his former school, Albertville Realschule, in the small town of Winnenden near Stuttgart. After killing nine pupils and three teachers he fled the the scene, killing a further three people before shooting himself in the head during an exchange of fire with the police.
I do wonder how an “exchange of gunfire” resulted in Kretschmer shooting himself – shouldn’t that be put down that he cooperated with law enforcement to end the tragic event? That aside, one must pay attention to the fact that German gun control is so strict that when they ran out of ways to control guns, they went on to control knives – you can’t carry a knife with a blade greater than 12 centimeters in Germany. My carving knife is about 8 inches long, a bit more than 20 centimeters. In other words, if I bring my carving knife over to your house in Germany to assist in carving up the turkey (no, not Al Gore – we do that with chain saw. ‘Cause he’s wooden. Like a tree. Get it?), I could get fined 10,000 Euros. And there is that concern about just what Germany will do if someone offs a guy using an 11 centimeter blade…
And just about now will come out the “argument” from the left – “well, if that’s the way you feel, why not allow people to have tanks and nuclear weapons in their homes”. To which I answer – sure, if you can figure out a way to safely store a nuclear weapon in your home and figure out a way that, if used, it does no harm to my property, then have at it. I answer that way because, “what a *&%@!i stupid argument to make” is rather rude.
Don’t ban guns – put people who use guns to commit a crime in jail. Its really all you can do.