Well, this issue is about get another visit. I think that's inevitable. Don't shoot the messenger here...pun intended...but this catastrophe in Las Vegas is going to force people on both sides to the table for some form of compromise. It's obviously been a heated issue and very polarizing for quite a few years, but I'm seeing even those who defended and rationalized our current laws coming out and agreeing that something has to be done. Before you read anything into my stance, let me say I'm only predicting that there's going to have to be some give and take and asking what, if anything, you would or would not change regardless of what side of the issue you're on. My views in a nutshell: (And I know nuttz)
I'm a gun owner. Always have been, whether it was rifles/shotguns for hunting or a handgun for protection. Unless my perspective changes drastically for some reason, I always will be.
I believe in the 2nd Amendment and a citizen's right to own firearms for both of the above purposes, including collecting and recreational use.
I do NOT believe that the current state of our gun control laws had anything to do with what happened Sunday night in Las Vegas or any other terrorist act, domestic or otherwise. As has been said numerous times, if someone is evil enough to commit mass murder, they can use anything from guns, to IED's to trucks, to machetes, to fertilizer etc. Eliminating guns would never stop the Stephen Paddock's of the world.
As for "eliminating guns"....yeah, never happen. End of discussion there.
Do I think the Dems, snowflakes, Liberal talk show hosts and Hollywood stars who live in gated houses and have armed bodyguards, are using this to shamelessly politicize the deaths of 58 people and injuries to 500+ more? Absolutely!
Do I also think the NRA is wielding way too much power and has enough politicians in their pocket to thwart any real gun control changes? Absolutely!
Does there need to be some form of compromise or more restrictions? In my opinion, yes. And that's not a knee-jerk reaction to Las Vegas. I've always felt that way.
Okay, having said all that, I'll submit that as a gun owner, I'm somewhat knowledgeable about guns but from many of the discussions I've seen here, many of you can schoolify me on the different types of weaponry out there. Like I said, I used to hunt and I want something for personal protection. Beyond that, my interest is a lot of meh.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it already illegal to own automatic weapons or those that have been modified such as the ones used in LV? That's kind of where I draw the line or better yet, don't understand the need for having something so capable of being used for those purposes. Again, not that everyone who owns one has thoughts of blowing away a bunch of people and again, this guy would have found other ways to do it. Paddock was both evil and crazy. But why own something like that? Much less 47 of them.
Ultimately, it may in fact be knee-jerk reaction, but even many of these country stars that partnered with the NRA for years are now coming out and saying enough is enough. There has to a line in the sand.
What say you? Do there need to be some additional limits? Or can they all kiss your ass and pry the gun from your cold, dead fingers?
27 Replies
5046 Views