May 14, 2013

Q&A On Gun Control With a Moderate, Average Joe

Q&As regarding gun control

With the current situation in the state of Illinois and the decline of gun control on the national level, I thought it would be interesting to have a Q&A session regarding the entire situation with guns in this country. I was emailed a couple of these questions. Yes, a few of them were from anti-gun folks who were also of the "don't like guns" variety.

Background: 51/49 liberal/conservative; active voter. Most commonly associates with the Libertarian Party. Registered independent. Social Liberal; Fiscal Conservative.

Q) Are the anti-gunners winning the war on the national level?
A) No. They have made small gains in states such as New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Colorado and Maryland. Except for Colorado, all of these states have been historically anti-gun, and in the case of New York and New Jersey- socialist in nature (nanny state where the government takes care of everything for you). On the national level, they have been unable to pass any significant legislation targeting gun owners, and now that it has been months after the Sandy Hook massacre, the iron is no longer hot enough for them to shape.

Q) Do you support Universal Background Checks? Why?
A) No. Any undue burden on a right recognized by the Constitution is a violation of that right. I admit that I take a hard line stance on that topic. If the UBCs were phone in and provided for by the taxpayer then I would support UBCs without registration or registration like paperwork, however that raises the question of if people would even use that. The answer is yes- the law abiding citizens- but not the criminals- or the ignorant to-be criminals. That is why UBCs do not address the problem, in addition to requiring "paperwork" "to be stored" in an ambiguous manner that may entail gun registration.

Q) Do you support registration of legally owned firearms? Why?
A) No. I do not trust the government to make decisions as to whether I can own something or not, especially when they have clearly indicated they will not give citizens due process. Historically, in countries such as Germany, the UK and Australia- even Canada- registration lead to confiscation after another tragedy. I should not have to register anything to exercise my fundamental right. It does not stop criminals from being violent. Criminals will never register their guns. It is none of the government's business what types of firearms I own.

Q) Do you support cracking down on straw purchasers by increasing jail sentencing and minimizing parole?
A) Yes.

Q) Do you support an assault weapons ban?
A) No. I do not recognize the term "assault weapons" anymore. The term "assault weapon" was a media invented term to lump together fully automatic rifles with semi-automatic look alikes. If a gun ban seeks to take away rights of the citizenry and disarm them (or prevent them from buying commonly used platforms) then I do not support them. To infringe on the right to keep and bear arms means to undermine, violate or to take away. Gun bans do just that.

Q) Do you support a high capacity clip ban?
A) No, and those are again invented terms. The standard capacity magazine for a pistol in 9mm is about 15 rounds, give or take 2-3 rounds. A clip is a device that feeds a magazine. Some magazines are built into the gun, but many are detachable. Most "clips" don't feature more than 10 rounds anyways. A standard magazine for a semi-automatic rifle is 30 rounds. It isn't a question of "needing" such a device. It is integral to the operation of the firearm. Any law that bans or regulates a firearm, or any part of a firearm is an undermining of the right to keep and bear arms.

Q) Do you support changing the Constitution to modify the 2nd Amendment?
A) No. Even if the 2nd amendment was modified, the Constitution does not grant the right to keep and bear arms. It cannot be "taken away" from the people lawfully. It exists upon birth of a US Citizen. I do not believe our fundamental rights came from God, or a God(s). The founders can say whatever they want- but the core principle of our country is the guarantee of these bill of rights, regardless of their origin- with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That core principle is what has made America what it is, and many have forgotten that principle- or choose to ignore it entirely.

Q) Do you support a ban on the carriage of firearms in public?
A) Absolutely not. The state of Illinois prohibits the carriage of firearms in public and is currently in hot water over the issue. The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. They can interpret that clause all they want- they can "make it mean whatever they think they want it to mean"- I believe the 2nd amendment is very clear. The right to keep a firearm, and the right to bear it in protection of self and for lawful purposes shall not be infringed.

Q) Do you support gun free zones?
A) Slaughter zones? no.

Q) Do you support guns in schools?
A) I refuse to answer a loaded question.

Q) Do you support police and armed security in schools?
A) I refuse to answer a loaded question.

Q) Do you think more guns in schools is the answer?
A) I refuse to answer an extremely loaded question.

Q) Do you support police and thoroughly checked out armed security in schools?
A) I would prefer a police officer be in schools to protect children. Currently a good fraction of schools in America are completely unprotected.

Q) Do you support the concealed carry of firearms by qualified and heavily screened school staff who are willing and able to?
A) Yes.

Q) Media sources claim that all teachers are against the idea of concealed carry inside schools. Do you think this is true? Why?
A) No. States such as Utah already allow highly screened and willing school personnel to carry firearms, and a half dozen more are considering that type of legislation.

Q) Do you believe an armed officer or school personnel would prevent a mass shooting?
A) I refuse to answer a loaded question.

Q) Do you believe an armed officer or school personnel would have a chance at limiting casualties? Why?
A) Yes. Time and time again when a lunatic goes on a mass shooting rampage, Their fantasy bubble has been popped when met with resistance.

Q) Do you believe that because some anti-gunners call for confiscation means all of them wish to achieve confiscation as an end goal?
A) No. However, the lowest common denominator with anti-gunners is to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens, which is why I oppose them.

Q) Are all anti-gunners Socialist or Communist?
A) I hear a lot of pro-gunners fueled with emotion calling Feinstein and other anti-gunners Socialist or Communist. While I agree that those that propagate a "nanny state" are socialist, like Michael Bloomberg, a proclaimed socialist, not all anti-gunners are socialist, communist or capitalist. There is a huge shade of gray here- and it is naiive to think that gray is strictly white or black. Similarly, not all socialists are anti-gun, pro gun and not all socialists agree that taking away rights is a good thing.

Q) Are you a socialist or communist?
A) No. I like Capitalism with programs for the public WHEN WE CAN AFFORD THEM AND WHEN DONE IN MODESTY.

Q) Is the anti-gun movement, as a whole calling for confiscation?
A) No.

Q) Are some anti-gun activists calling for confiscation?
A) Yes.

Q) Do you believe the president will take your guns away?
A) I refuse to answer a loaded question. This one needs to be explained. Do I believe Obama supports door to door confiscation? no I do not. He believes in limiting my access to certain firearms and feeding devices- and that in of itself can be seen as a sort of equal to confiscation.

Q) Do you believe the White House is full of idiots, or do you support them?
A) Idiots.

Q) Does the president have the right answers to solving the gun problem in America?
A) You will never get rid of violence or legislate morality. He is targeting the tools used for crimes. If you take away guns from violent people, they will find other things to be violent with. Bricks. Baseball Bats. Iron Knuckles. Homemade explosive devices. You can't legislate morality. Will restricting guns for all solve the problem? absolutely not. The argument "we must do something to save at least 1 potential life" does not justify the infringement of fundamental rights. He is playing with fire, and had certainly poked the giant ass rattle snake.

Q) A little boy in New Jersey found access to his father's gun and killed his little sister. A similar situation happened where a little boy killed his friend. What do you think about that?
A) The owner of the firearm should be locked up, in this particular case(s) for failure to secure a firearm with children in the house. He did not store the ammo away separately. The guns were not secured. I believe penalities should be increased in cases of child endangerment with firearms involved.

No comments: