Tweet
GFSZ, Liberal Idiocy or Clever Strategy?
The nation has Problem A, while anti-2A types believe we also have Problem B.
Problem A (mass shootings)
Problem B (too many guns)
Liberals propose to solve Problem A with Solutions C,D,E,F.
Solution C (background checks)
As we know, many of the mass shooters passed background checks or completely bypassed them by stealing or building guns. Even if stringent background checks were in place, a motivated future mass killer can find a gun or build a bomb. In other words, a background check is but a speed bump on the road towards stardom for mass killers.
Solution D (prohibit carry)
There have been cases where the mass shooter's twisted manifesto or online postings confirm they chose areas that prohibit carry because they want to kill more people before being interrupted by someone with a gun. A sign that says no guns allowed empowers those intent on causing harm and disarms the law abiding.
Solution E (ban certain types of weapons)
A weapon's capability is, in theory, correlated with the number of injured and killed, however the worst cases of mass shootings happened with handguns, some of the least effective weapons. Society is untrained to react to an armed shooter, so people tend to acquiesce to their demands to line up and wait for their turn to die. Perhaps if everyone was armed and had the courage to fight back, certain weapons could give an advantage to the mass shooter.
Solution F (make ammo difficult to acquire)
How much ammo does a mass shooter need to kill people? Not much; a box or two is enough to make headlines. In addition, ammo is easy to assemble or even to make from scratch. In any case, there is so much ammo already out there it wouldn't be difficult to scrounge up enough.
***
On the surface, it would seem as if the liberals are idiots for proposing Solutions C,D,E, and F because they would do absolutely nothing to prevent Problem A. From my point of view, they are actually very clever proposing those solutions, while ignoring or obfuscating the following:
media glorification of shooters, cases of CCW successfully thwarting crime,
mental health and chemically altered personalities,
because their main goal is not to solve Problem A but to solve Problem B with Solution X, harass and discourage gun ownership, marginalize and ridicule gun culture. In fact, Problem A is a way to get the large portion of the general public unfamiliar with guns riled up about Solution X. In other words, Problem A is the gasoline required to generate support for Solutions C,D,E, and F, which have no effect on Problem A but together form Solution X for Problem B. It's a vicious cycle for gun owners because Problem A will keep occurring no matter how thoroughly Solutions C,D,E, and F are enforced, while our ability to keep and bear are infringed upon more and more. When Problem A happens again, in spite of the Solution C,D,E, or F that was passed as law, the cycle continues (Solution X for Problem B).
In closing, be wary of the phrase "Let's DO something, anything" about Problem A, because it's always about Problem B instead.
The nation has Problem A, while anti-2A types believe we also have Problem B.
Problem A (mass shootings)
Problem B (too many guns)
Liberals propose to solve Problem A with Solutions C,D,E,F.
Solution C (background checks)
As we know, many of the mass shooters passed background checks or completely bypassed them by stealing or building guns. Even if stringent background checks were in place, a motivated future mass killer can find a gun or build a bomb. In other words, a background check is but a speed bump on the road towards stardom for mass killers.
Solution D (prohibit carry)
There have been cases where the mass shooter's twisted manifesto or online postings confirm they chose areas that prohibit carry because they want to kill more people before being interrupted by someone with a gun. A sign that says no guns allowed empowers those intent on causing harm and disarms the law abiding.
Solution E (ban certain types of weapons)
A weapon's capability is, in theory, correlated with the number of injured and killed, however the worst cases of mass shootings happened with handguns, some of the least effective weapons. Society is untrained to react to an armed shooter, so people tend to acquiesce to their demands to line up and wait for their turn to die. Perhaps if everyone was armed and had the courage to fight back, certain weapons could give an advantage to the mass shooter.
Solution F (make ammo difficult to acquire)
How much ammo does a mass shooter need to kill people? Not much; a box or two is enough to make headlines. In addition, ammo is easy to assemble or even to make from scratch. In any case, there is so much ammo already out there it wouldn't be difficult to scrounge up enough.
***
On the surface, it would seem as if the liberals are idiots for proposing Solutions C,D,E, and F because they would do absolutely nothing to prevent Problem A. From my point of view, they are actually very clever proposing those solutions, while ignoring or obfuscating the following:
media glorification of shooters, cases of CCW successfully thwarting crime,
mental health and chemically altered personalities,
because their main goal is not to solve Problem A but to solve Problem B with Solution X, harass and discourage gun ownership, marginalize and ridicule gun culture. In fact, Problem A is a way to get the large portion of the general public unfamiliar with guns riled up about Solution X. In other words, Problem A is the gasoline required to generate support for Solutions C,D,E, and F, which have no effect on Problem A but together form Solution X for Problem B. It's a vicious cycle for gun owners because Problem A will keep occurring no matter how thoroughly Solutions C,D,E, and F are enforced, while our ability to keep and bear are infringed upon more and more. When Problem A happens again, in spite of the Solution C,D,E, or F that was passed as law, the cycle continues (Solution X for Problem B).
In closing, be wary of the phrase "Let's DO something, anything" about Problem A, because it's always about Problem B instead.
Yeah frickin right liberals, your solutions only address Problem B, you've done NOTHING towards Problem A.
Comment