A liberal on gun control
I don’t think this is about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals at all. I think this is about ridiculing and shaming legal gun owners.
I think we do this for two reasons. 1. By and large, we don’t own guns. We want to believe that our way of looking at the world is correct and therefore, we want gun owners to give up their guns in order to validate our ways of life. This is stupid, but not malicious.
I disagree that it is not malicious. Waiting periods have killed women who went to buy a gun only to be told to wait. Even a day is a lot of time to wait and bad things happen:
In April of 1991, Bonnie’s relatives were grieving her untimely death. She had just inquired about getting a gun to protect herself from a husband who had repeatedly threatened to kill her. She was told there was a 48-hour waiting period to buy a handgun.
Unfortunately, Bonnie was never able to pick up the gun she needed for self-defense. She and her two sons were killed the very next day by an abusive husband of whom the police were well aware.
June 7th, 2006 at 9:36 am
I don’t think the point of view itself is malicious. If you think I should give up my guns, debate me. I can go all night.
But don’t try to impose restrictions to make my way of life more difficult, and in some cases, more dangerous.
June 7th, 2006 at 9:42 am
To my mind, “malicious” implies ill intent, not just ill effects. Anyone who supports waiting periods for the express purpose of getting abuse victims killed is malicious indeed, but I think you can count those people on one hand. Are gun control advocates negligent in this respect? Possibly, but no more so than the gun shop owner, for (presumably) neglecting to advise Ms. Elmasri that there was no waiting period on shotguns.
June 7th, 2006 at 9:43 am
Xrlq, Good point regarding intent.
June 7th, 2006 at 12:11 pm
But if it saves…er..costs just one…er…three lives…uhhh…never mind.