Welcome to Tuesday, April
20, the 110th day of the year.
For me, it is going to be the same old, same old, a day just like any other since I semi-retired.
Do some work, do a little shopping, make my son’s lunch for work, cook dinner, wait until my wife comes home from work, watch a little TV, and then go to sleep.
Nothing much else is happening.
But April 20 is one of those days that historically rings out as a somewhat special day on the calendar, and not for all the right reasons.
Just looking at the recent past, it is a day that will truly live in infamy.
It unfortunately is not a good day for many of us, simply because this day marks the 22nd anniversary of the Columbine High School massacre, where two young people killed 13 people and wounded 24 others in a gun rampage in the Colorado high school.
There was no rhyme nor reason for their senseless act, which included home-made bombs, one of which was found in the school’s cafeteria.
The two assailants—who were school outcasts and were reportedly targets of bullying—committed suicide.
This event rocked our nation to its core, because prior to this, schools were thought to be the true sanctuary of peacefulness, the one place young people could be where they didn’t have to worry and didn’t have to be afraid.
But things changed when this happened, and during the past 20-plus years, schools have become targets for numerous mentally deranged people to vent their frustrations at, and there have been several almost copycat events that I won’t go into here.
And, of course, we continue to suffer from such violence apart from schools, whether at the workplace, at the mall, or in our neighborhoods.
I have to tell you, this year, there seems to have been one mass shooting after another without stop.
I don’t know if the pandemic is fueling all of this rage, but we have had one such event after another, and I am going to say the latest was at that FedEx warehouse the other day, but I haven’t checked the news out yet, so there could have been other, more recent ones.
That is how bad it has gotten.
And yes, gun advocates, the problem is the proliferation of weapons on the street, their easy availability—most of the guns involved in these massacres are legally purchased—and their use by the mentally deranged.
I do not argue that we have a right to bear arms—we do, and if you feel the need to protect yourself and your family by legally purchasing a gun, that is your right, and it is also your problem.
But what of high-power artillery?
I do not understand why people need to have firearms that bear clips of 50 or even 100 rounds, and why people not only need one of these types of firearms, but they seemingly need more than one of these in their collections.
Those types of firearms should only be used for warfare, and not for personal protection, and these are the types of firearms that are prevalent in these massacres, because they can be shot off quickly, making the carnage quick.
Can someone please explain to me why anyone, any citizen, any one person needs such a firearm in their possession?
Again, I am not talking about a pistol. I am talking about multi-shot guns like Glocks and the like.
The problem with the pro-gun lobby is that they mix in a regular pistol with these types of guns, pretty much stating that the banning of ANY gun takes away their personal rights as American citizens.
Personally, a gun is something that I have no need to possess, no need to have a license for, no need to have in my home.
But that is me, and I do not agree that the banning of ALL guns is the way to stop gun violence.
You feel the need to have a gun, you get your license and do it legally, that is fine with me.
But possessing multi-shot artillery like the firearms that have been used in these massacres? There isn’t a reason in the world to own such a firearm and to have such artillery in your home.
NONE.
And it does not abridge anyone’s rights by banning them.
The FedEx shooter was a young, mentally deranged person who casually, and legally, was able to obtain such artillery from his local gun shop.
How could such a thing have happened?
Look, we already know that background checks are very lax, and just about anyone, in any mental state, can get a gun.
The interesting thing is that in this particular case, the person in question had had a history with police, had had a mental history that even his mother questioned about to authorities, and had already had a gun taken away from him by the police.
But he was able to somehow skirt all of this and purchase not just a gun, but firearms that could wipe out people in one fell swoop, which is exactly what happened.
And it should not have been allowed to happen.
The checks and balances were not there, not in place, and not strong enough to prevent his legal … again, I say LEGAL ... purchases.
Look, most of the people who own guns are good people, are mentally sound, and would never put themselves in such a situation where they were using these firearms to wipe out a swath of people.
But with lax firearms laws in this country, without a national firearms law or set of laws, there is laxity in the process.
And when you have the lax laws we have with the mentally ill in this country, occasionally the two will mix, and you have mentally deranged people bearing arms, which is not a good compatibility in any way, shape or form.
So for gun enthusiasts, nobody is taking away your right to bear arms by banning assault-type artillery from legal purchase.
You can still own all the pistols you want, or feel that you need.
But you do not need assault-type weapons in your arsenal.
If you feel that you do, then you must question yourself as to why you need these guns—and for that matter any guns—in your possession.
There is something deeper here than your rights as a citizen to bear arms if you feel the need to own artillery with clips of 50 or 100 or whatever.
To me, it is sickness, total sickness, but it will go on because not all the states in our union are on the same page related to the bearing of arms.
It is our right to bear arms, as it is our right to drive, but would you drive a late model car or a high-firepower tank if you had the opportunity?
For me, it is going to be the same old, same old, a day just like any other since I semi-retired.
Do some work, do a little shopping, make my son’s lunch for work, cook dinner, wait until my wife comes home from work, watch a little TV, and then go to sleep.
Nothing much else is happening.
But April 20 is one of those days that historically rings out as a somewhat special day on the calendar, and not for all the right reasons.
Just looking at the recent past, it is a day that will truly live in infamy.
It unfortunately is not a good day for many of us, simply because this day marks the 22nd anniversary of the Columbine High School massacre, where two young people killed 13 people and wounded 24 others in a gun rampage in the Colorado high school.
There was no rhyme nor reason for their senseless act, which included home-made bombs, one of which was found in the school’s cafeteria.
The two assailants—who were school outcasts and were reportedly targets of bullying—committed suicide.
This event rocked our nation to its core, because prior to this, schools were thought to be the true sanctuary of peacefulness, the one place young people could be where they didn’t have to worry and didn’t have to be afraid.
But things changed when this happened, and during the past 20-plus years, schools have become targets for numerous mentally deranged people to vent their frustrations at, and there have been several almost copycat events that I won’t go into here.
And, of course, we continue to suffer from such violence apart from schools, whether at the workplace, at the mall, or in our neighborhoods.
I have to tell you, this year, there seems to have been one mass shooting after another without stop.
I don’t know if the pandemic is fueling all of this rage, but we have had one such event after another, and I am going to say the latest was at that FedEx warehouse the other day, but I haven’t checked the news out yet, so there could have been other, more recent ones.
That is how bad it has gotten.
And yes, gun advocates, the problem is the proliferation of weapons on the street, their easy availability—most of the guns involved in these massacres are legally purchased—and their use by the mentally deranged.
I do not argue that we have a right to bear arms—we do, and if you feel the need to protect yourself and your family by legally purchasing a gun, that is your right, and it is also your problem.
But what of high-power artillery?
I do not understand why people need to have firearms that bear clips of 50 or even 100 rounds, and why people not only need one of these types of firearms, but they seemingly need more than one of these in their collections.
Those types of firearms should only be used for warfare, and not for personal protection, and these are the types of firearms that are prevalent in these massacres, because they can be shot off quickly, making the carnage quick.
Can someone please explain to me why anyone, any citizen, any one person needs such a firearm in their possession?
Again, I am not talking about a pistol. I am talking about multi-shot guns like Glocks and the like.
The problem with the pro-gun lobby is that they mix in a regular pistol with these types of guns, pretty much stating that the banning of ANY gun takes away their personal rights as American citizens.
Personally, a gun is something that I have no need to possess, no need to have a license for, no need to have in my home.
But that is me, and I do not agree that the banning of ALL guns is the way to stop gun violence.
You feel the need to have a gun, you get your license and do it legally, that is fine with me.
But possessing multi-shot artillery like the firearms that have been used in these massacres? There isn’t a reason in the world to own such a firearm and to have such artillery in your home.
NONE.
And it does not abridge anyone’s rights by banning them.
The FedEx shooter was a young, mentally deranged person who casually, and legally, was able to obtain such artillery from his local gun shop.
How could such a thing have happened?
Look, we already know that background checks are very lax, and just about anyone, in any mental state, can get a gun.
The interesting thing is that in this particular case, the person in question had had a history with police, had had a mental history that even his mother questioned about to authorities, and had already had a gun taken away from him by the police.
But he was able to somehow skirt all of this and purchase not just a gun, but firearms that could wipe out people in one fell swoop, which is exactly what happened.
And it should not have been allowed to happen.
The checks and balances were not there, not in place, and not strong enough to prevent his legal … again, I say LEGAL ... purchases.
Look, most of the people who own guns are good people, are mentally sound, and would never put themselves in such a situation where they were using these firearms to wipe out a swath of people.
But with lax firearms laws in this country, without a national firearms law or set of laws, there is laxity in the process.
And when you have the lax laws we have with the mentally ill in this country, occasionally the two will mix, and you have mentally deranged people bearing arms, which is not a good compatibility in any way, shape or form.
So for gun enthusiasts, nobody is taking away your right to bear arms by banning assault-type artillery from legal purchase.
You can still own all the pistols you want, or feel that you need.
But you do not need assault-type weapons in your arsenal.
If you feel that you do, then you must question yourself as to why you need these guns—and for that matter any guns—in your possession.
There is something deeper here than your rights as a citizen to bear arms if you feel the need to own artillery with clips of 50 or 100 or whatever.
To me, it is sickness, total sickness, but it will go on because not all the states in our union are on the same page related to the bearing of arms.
It is our right to bear arms, as it is our right to drive, but would you drive a late model car or a high-firepower tank if you had the opportunity?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.