Just as we'd rather make our kids sit through duck and cover drills rather than ridding the world of nuclear weapons, we'd rather make our kids do active shooter drills than rid the country of assault weapons. As always, our irrational fears cause us to double down on the proliferation of destructive devices that end up fucking the world up even worse than it was before the existence of said weapons that apparently make us feel so much safer at such a cost.
For what it's worth, I'd gladly chuck my LMT rifle into a volcano if I could get the country to pass a new assault weapons ban. But until the whole country disarms together, I don't trust the armed right wing militias, nor do I trust the feds or the local cops (especially not the sheriffs) or the military's willingness to put those guys down in the event of a real armed fascist uprising in this country. In that scenario, I could see half of the police and military (or more) throwing in with the militias rather than putting them down. Too much overlap in those venn diagrams for my own personal comfort.
My husband says the same thing. He told me he would gladly turn in his old deer rifle & the shotgun he used to use to scare the heron away from our trout pond every summer, if it meant helping get rid of gun violence.
I'm a longtime gun owner. I was born and raised in Texas where I lived most of my life. I then lived in Ohio for the duration of the Trump years, then finally moving to Alaska. These are all *very* red/pro-gun states and the pro-gun mentality is one I've had driven into me my whole life. I was on a shooting team in college and fired hundreds of rounds a month. I currently own 5 handguns, two rifles, and a shotgun (most of which I acquired after arriving in Alaska because I live on a mountain in the forest and moose, bears, coyotes, wolves, etc. are a very real concern).
All of that is to say that, though I've spent the majority of my life in support of gun access and still see value in some limited gun ownership, like Charlie (I think this is what he's said), something broke in me with Sandy Hook. And it's only gotten worse since then. I still need some firearms because of where/how I live, but I would *gladly* give up many/most firearms if it just meant putting even a reasonable dent in the gun violence of this country.
I can live (hopefully) with private gun rights if they did not include military weapons and accessories. Much harder to murder dozens of children in minutes with handguns, shotguns and rifles.
The difference being is you do not have the high powered AR15 type rifle nor its ridiculous ammunition that is literally designed to tear through a person causing so much damage that NOTHING can be fixed. A hunting rifle is not the same. A pistol is not the same. These people protecting these types of high powered semiautomatic rifles seem to forget they were not legal in 1994. Good old G.W. Bush let the law lapse and then they were. We weren't always like this. 30 years isn't that long ago. No one needs these rifles. The police don't want them out there. Retired military has spoken up about how they're only designed to kill. Any person who is an actual firearms owner knows, this type of rifle isn't for "protecting" your family. You're not using that in your home. The rounds will totally go through doors, walls, anywhere and anyone knows that's not ok. Firearms safety 101, know where your rounds are going. ЁЯШС
Believe me, as someone from the "red state" gun culture, they NEVER forget the assault weapons ban. It's just one more instance of federal tyranny and proof they need more guns to fight said perceived tyranny.
As far as an AR-15 for defense, I actually nearly bought one and would totally use it to defend myself, my family, or my property. The fact that it's as effective as it is just makes it even more the case. Perhaps for those living in different circumstances it's harder to justify; especially in dense urban/suburban areas. I still get to fall back on the whole moose/bear thing and the fact that my nearest neighbor is over 1/4 mile away. We have known black bear and grizzlies all around my property, and we have moose walk through our homesite practically daily. These things are no joke and I want to stop them in their tracks. For those that've never seen a moose in person, an adult bull moose is incomprehensibly large and they can take a lot of damage and still keep going.
Instead of an AR, my home defense weapon of choice is a 12ga shotgun, which itself is quite destructive. What it lacks is the range and precision of a rifle.
My brother, a Marine, told me to make sure if I had to fire the gun that I aimed for the body mass in the middle. (He said law enforcement is taught that too; none of this shot them in the leg stuff.) He wanted to make sure I was capable emotionally of doing that. I assured him I was. Still am.
Yeah, whenever people say something like, "why didn't they shoot him in the shoulder?", I have to assume they've probably not handled a gun much, let alone under fire. I've never been in a gun fight, but having competed, I can tell you that the stress definitely affects your precision. Unless you've trained a ton, keep it simple.
No because they still have a purpose for me. That said, if there was a referendum on handing in certain firearms, I'd readily vote in favor of the restriction from purchasing them and the repossession of many firearms, even ones I own.
What would you think of being required to carry insurance for the guns you own? Some kind of responsibility if they are misused somehow. I've heard that idea floated in the past.
At this point, I'm open to a lot of ideas. If each gun I owned continued to cost me money after I purchased it, it would probably deter me from owning superfluous guns (and what a superfluous gun is would be impacted by the burden of owning it).
I have the same fear you do on the venn diagram overlaps.... I never read anyone assessing that threat - and when it is, it's to downplay it (ie, by the military).... Perhaps they're right, but it just doesn't feel right, does it?
All it takes is for enough people in the field grade officer corps in the Army/Marine Corps to start questioning orders during a national crisis like that. That is all that it takes to have an American Kabul moment.
Not everyone's interpretation of what the constitution specifies is the same. Especially not for the uber-religious, and the military's officer corps is rife with that type of uber-religious people in positions of power.
I've been warming to the idea of compulsory military or civil service at 18. We need everyone to get a first-hand understanding of our government and those that work to support it. This and civics classes in grade school where students learn, not just our history, but the philosophy behind our country's declared values as espoused by the Constitution.
Just as we'd rather make our kids sit through duck and cover drills rather than ridding the world of nuclear weapons, we'd rather make our kids do active shooter drills than rid the country of assault weapons. As always, our irrational fears cause us to double down on the proliferation of destructive devices that end up fucking the world up even worse than it was before the existence of said weapons that apparently make us feel so much safer at such a cost.
For what it's worth, I'd gladly chuck my LMT rifle into a volcano if I could get the country to pass a new assault weapons ban. But until the whole country disarms together, I don't trust the armed right wing militias, nor do I trust the feds or the local cops (especially not the sheriffs) or the military's willingness to put those guys down in the event of a real armed fascist uprising in this country. In that scenario, I could see half of the police and military (or more) throwing in with the militias rather than putting them down. Too much overlap in those venn diagrams for my own personal comfort.
Great post!
My husband says the same thing. He told me he would gladly turn in his old deer rifle & the shotgun he used to use to scare the heron away from our trout pond every summer, if it meant helping get rid of gun violence.
I'm a longtime gun owner. I was born and raised in Texas where I lived most of my life. I then lived in Ohio for the duration of the Trump years, then finally moving to Alaska. These are all *very* red/pro-gun states and the pro-gun mentality is one I've had driven into me my whole life. I was on a shooting team in college and fired hundreds of rounds a month. I currently own 5 handguns, two rifles, and a shotgun (most of which I acquired after arriving in Alaska because I live on a mountain in the forest and moose, bears, coyotes, wolves, etc. are a very real concern).
All of that is to say that, though I've spent the majority of my life in support of gun access and still see value in some limited gun ownership, like Charlie (I think this is what he's said), something broke in me with Sandy Hook. And it's only gotten worse since then. I still need some firearms because of where/how I live, but I would *gladly* give up many/most firearms if it just meant putting even a reasonable dent in the gun violence of this country.
I can live (hopefully) with private gun rights if they did not include military weapons and accessories. Much harder to murder dozens of children in minutes with handguns, shotguns and rifles.
The difference being is you do not have the high powered AR15 type rifle nor its ridiculous ammunition that is literally designed to tear through a person causing so much damage that NOTHING can be fixed. A hunting rifle is not the same. A pistol is not the same. These people protecting these types of high powered semiautomatic rifles seem to forget they were not legal in 1994. Good old G.W. Bush let the law lapse and then they were. We weren't always like this. 30 years isn't that long ago. No one needs these rifles. The police don't want them out there. Retired military has spoken up about how they're only designed to kill. Any person who is an actual firearms owner knows, this type of rifle isn't for "protecting" your family. You're not using that in your home. The rounds will totally go through doors, walls, anywhere and anyone knows that's not ok. Firearms safety 101, know where your rounds are going. ЁЯШС
Believe me, as someone from the "red state" gun culture, they NEVER forget the assault weapons ban. It's just one more instance of federal tyranny and proof they need more guns to fight said perceived tyranny.
As far as an AR-15 for defense, I actually nearly bought one and would totally use it to defend myself, my family, or my property. The fact that it's as effective as it is just makes it even more the case. Perhaps for those living in different circumstances it's harder to justify; especially in dense urban/suburban areas. I still get to fall back on the whole moose/bear thing and the fact that my nearest neighbor is over 1/4 mile away. We have known black bear and grizzlies all around my property, and we have moose walk through our homesite practically daily. These things are no joke and I want to stop them in their tracks. For those that've never seen a moose in person, an adult bull moose is incomprehensibly large and they can take a lot of damage and still keep going.
Instead of an AR, my home defense weapon of choice is a 12ga shotgun, which itself is quite destructive. What it lacks is the range and precision of a rifle.
My brother, a Marine, told me to make sure if I had to fire the gun that I aimed for the body mass in the middle. (He said law enforcement is taught that too; none of this shot them in the leg stuff.) He wanted to make sure I was capable emotionally of doing that. I assured him I was. Still am.
Yeah, whenever people say something like, "why didn't they shoot him in the shoulder?", I have to assume they've probably not handled a gun much, let alone under fire. I've never been in a gun fight, but having competed, I can tell you that the stress definitely affects your precision. Unless you've trained a ton, keep it simple.
I'm from Northern Maine. I've seen moose. You still don't need an AR15 for home defense.
No because they still have a purpose for me. That said, if there was a referendum on handing in certain firearms, I'd readily vote in favor of the restriction from purchasing them and the repossession of many firearms, even ones I own.
What would you think of being required to carry insurance for the guns you own? Some kind of responsibility if they are misused somehow. I've heard that idea floated in the past.
At this point, I'm open to a lot of ideas. If each gun I owned continued to cost me money after I purchased it, it would probably deter me from owning superfluous guns (and what a superfluous gun is would be impacted by the burden of owning it).
I have the same fear you do on the venn diagram overlaps.... I never read anyone assessing that threat - and when it is, it's to downplay it (ie, by the military).... Perhaps they're right, but it just doesn't feel right, does it?
All it takes is for enough people in the field grade officer corps in the Army/Marine Corps to start questioning orders during a national crisis like that. That is all that it takes to have an American Kabul moment.
Not everyone's interpretation of what the constitution specifies is the same. Especially not for the uber-religious, and the military's officer corps is rife with that type of uber-religious people in positions of power.
I hate to say it, but that's another argument for universal military service.
I've been warming to the idea of compulsory military or civil service at 18. We need everyone to get a first-hand understanding of our government and those that work to support it. This and civics classes in grade school where students learn, not just our history, but the philosophy behind our country's declared values as espoused by the Constitution.