The thing is, it is about us, at least partially. Were the ones being asked to make sacrifices that people who dont own guns, and have no use for them, are not. Its good to have discussions, and talking to gun owners is a good start: The mere fact that a person has gone through the process of buying a gun, and knows what was involved, usually puts their general knowledge on the subject above your average non-gun owner. But the most important thing is that the discussion not turn into a lecture, which all too often is what happens (the one on this thread has been good and respectful, for the most part).
Im one of those people most of you would characterize as unyielding on the subject. Its not because I dont care about people dying. My heart sinks whenever I hear about one of these events, but I usually get about 30 seconds to feel sad before some demagoguing politician blasts out a tweet basically accusing people like me of being complicit in it.
Ive been informally following and learning about gun policy for the better part of twenty years. Im pretty well acquainted with the realities of guns in America. For the record, there are about 300 million civilian owned firearms in the US, with millions more added every year, and these weapons have a shelf life of decades or longer.
So when well-meaning people make gun control proposals, and talk about things like eliminating private sales, banning magazines over a certain size, or increasing background check times, I immediately know that these modest changes are going to do next to nothing to stop mass shootings (or gun homicide in general, the vast majority of which are not mass shootings).
OK, maybe they would help from a statistical perspective. Maybe well move from 12 horrific shootings a year with 10 fatalities each (making up those numbers) to 10 with 8 (I strongly doubt any of the changes proposed would be even that effective). But they wont stop, just due to the sheer number of guns out there. And what will happen then? Will everyone who pushed for those changes in the law, and their elected officials, be content to stop there? When the next Breaking News headline hits, with pictures of screaming, sobbing children and family members all over the internet, will whats already passed seem like enough? Im guessing no- once theyve enacted the currently politically-palatable ideas, theyll move the window and ask for more.
The truth is, without drastic, wholesale bans on most types of firearms, with mandatory confiscation combined with draconian enforcement, youre never going to see an end to these types of shootings (and youd probably still occasionally see them even then, since the existing supply is so vast). I personally dont want that, and dont believe the Constitution allows that.
I know most people here will say No, thats a scare tactic, thats not where its going (and to those who admitted otherwise, thanks for your honesty), I know that its not the stated goal at this point. But thirty years down the line, with gun ownership under ever increasing restrictions, with the total number of guns owners decreasing to a smaller and smaller percentage, can you vouch for that generation of elected officials, and the voters who are putting them in office?
By all means, lets increase what goes into these background checks; Im always totally astounded when the histories of these shooters come out, and the utter craziness of their behaviors is revealed, that none of it ever made it into an official record. Lets look at school security and see what can be done there, because if youre not controlling access, youre not keeping guns out. But restricting what responsible, adult American citizens can buy? I say no to that, and I dont want to take a single step down that road, because Im pretty sure I know where it ends.
