I try not to respond to bait on Facebook but every once in a while I can't help myself. This was a response to a post on Facebook praising new gun control laws a while back, specifically ones that Obama was trying to implement in 2016.
The post I commented on basically made the following points:
Anyone who does not “applaud the attempt” suffers from “hidden racism” and an “idiotic way of thinking”.
Any defense of a dissenting opinion using the Constitution or matters of liberty proves your “callowness” and “lack of compassion”.
Obama’s actions are worth supporting even if it only saves one life and damn anybody who thinks otherwise.
Now given that this is a pretty insulting post for anyone who may have legitimate differences of opinion on this matter and the fact that the post was open to comments, I made what I thought was a fairly reasoned response:
The 2nd Amendment was a direct reaction to the British government, the colonists own government at the time, attempting to seize their weapons leading up the the Revolutionary war. By and large they believed that the right to own weapons was necessary as a last ditch defense against tyranny whether it be of foreign or domestic origin.
You can certainly argue about whether or not and how this still applies and whether or not it is a right that is still important. And yes, the men who wrote the Constitution were flawed individuals and for the most part they realized this which is why they created a couple of ways to change the Constitution via amendments. My concerns with executive orders that attempt to circumvent the 2nd Amendment and the legislative process, even in a minor way, lie not only with the gun issue in particular but the precedent it sets for eroding the Constitution and all of the rights it guarantees down the road. It isn’t just about what President Obama might do today but about what any future president might do years down the road. Once rights are taken away they are very difficult to get back, especially if you actually need them.
I applaud any genuine attempt to save lives but it is arguable whether or not these changes would do that. The gun issue in particular is overly politicized by both parties and arguments are always emotionally charged and seemingly seldom based on facts. The statistics say that gun deaths only amount to 1.3% of all deaths in the U.S. and more than of half those are suicides, that gun violence has been on a generally downward trend since 1983 and that mass shootings have generally declined since 1994. Add to that the fact that gun sales generally spike whenever new gun control measures are introduced and my cynical mind is left wondering if the true motives are anything other than political.
Having said that, certain measures make sense. You lose rights when you are convicted of a crime and losing the right to own a gun makes sense for convicted criminals. Background checks and reasonable waiting periods make sense in most cases and it is unclear to me at this point how these new rules will be interpreted and enforced and what, if any, real 2nd amendment impact there would be.
At the end of the day, the problem is that criminals don’t follow the law and gun laws and regulations affect otherwise law abiding citizens far more than they affect criminals. Something like 500,000 guns are stolen every year so unless we are willing as a society to completely give up the 2nd amendment and ban all guns, they will continue to be readily available to criminals willing to use them regardless of what new registration or background check legislation is enacted. If, as a society, we ARE willing to give up the 2nd amendment then it should be done through the rule of law and the amendment process.
FWIW all the statistics presented here come from the Wikipedia article titled “Gun violence in the United States.”
The nearly immediate response was something along the lines of “Post on your wall, not on mine. Post something like this again and you will be dropped.” I’m posting here instead.
This is someone I have only briefly met and do not really know in real life but has been a long time Facebook friend and is someone whom I generally like and respect. I have to say though that while I understand (but mostly disagree with) the reasoning of those who want more gun control, I really don’t understand this attitude nor why people post statements that are obviously controversial in a relatively public forum and expect and allow no dissenting opinions. Facebook may not be the best forum for your thoughts if that is the case.
