I could have called this “Governmental Bass-ackwardness” or “Why I’ll Never Be A Democrat” (as redundant as that may be), but those titles cover way too many different subjects, and I want this to be a single-subject post.

“Gun Control” is a hot-button subject. As such, it’s prone to purely emotional reactions and rhetoric; this means most of the shriller arguments being made have little basis in reality.

I say that because there are critical factors missing in the public debate, facets being ignored for the sake of sensational headlines. So if you will indulge me, I’ll attempt to temper the emotion with fact. Including the fact that government is approaching this subject from the same perspective it tends to take with any public issue: backwards.

We’re not going to dwell on the legal arguments; if you look into it the way I have, you’ll see that the legal aspect of the private ownership of firearms is actually pretty cut-and-dried. It’s guaranteed to us in the Constitution as a right (as opposed to a privilege), and has been affirmed by the US Supreme Court on numerous occasions. Given that it’s a right, an argument that someone doesn’t “need” a particular firearm is immaterial and does not factor in to the discussion, no matter how much some people might want it to.

If you want to give up that right, either by choice or by being adjudicated unfit for any of a variety of reasons (including criminal behavior or violent mental illness), that’s up to you.

What we are going to dwell on is the debate itself, and the realities that most people ignore.

For me, one of the most puzzling aspects of this debate is that we seem to be placing the blame for the misuse of a firearm on the firearm itself. It’s not just “violence” it’s “gun violence.” The media tells us more about the caliber and model of a firearm used than about the person who pulled the trigger. It’s as if the gun walked up and started firing of its own volition.

I hate to be the one to break it to some people, but a firearm of any description is just a few pounds of refined metal and composite plastic or wood. Period. It has no consciousness, no musculature, no ability to function on its own. It cannot be ascribed even the most rudimentary motivation, since it is not alive. It’s less alive than the coronavirus. It is no different in that regard than any other tool.

I can hear my mother already rearing back and exclaiming loudly how guns are different and going on about apples and oranges, and in one aspect, she’s right. A firearm is more capable of human destruction than most other tools; these were originally designed as hunting weapons – or weapons of war – regardless of how they’ve been redesigned and currently used. I get that. This is why those who choose to be armed must take more care than they would with a socket wrench, but it doesn’t change the basic fact that a gun is a tool requiring a human to make it function, according to that human’s intentions.

And as with any other tool, a firearm can be used for good, or with evil intent.

And this is where the upcoming round of “Gun Control” legislation – in fact, all “Gun Control” legislation – gets it wrong. Backwards.

Understanding that this is a tool, we realize that the majority of people are responsible people, and can be expected to own firearms responsibly, and not pose a hazard to others. These are the people the catchphrase “law-abiding citizens” has come to represent. These are the “good guys” (to use another cliché) who use their firearms for sport, competitions, hunting, etc. And for defense against the other, smaller segment of humanity that lacks a moral compass, who has a complete disregard for the law, who is perfectly fine with taking what is yours – over your dead body, if it makes it easier for them.

Yet the most recent bills passed by the US House of Representatives, HR 8 and HR 1446, do not address the criminal misuse or acquisition of firearms. The focus of these bills is squarely on the “law-abiding citizen” who is already a responsible gun owner, and on the heretofore legal transfer of firearms between vendor and customer, and transfers between private citizens, even family members. If this legislation is ever made law, it will slow the purchase process to a crawl, ban outright some commonly-owned firearms and accessories (thereby making criminals out of otherwise stand-up people), require that even legacy transfers (family heirlooms) happen through a licensed gun dealer, all of which will leave the “good guys” with less ability to exercise their Constitutional rights and fewer resources to defend themselves.

Meanwhile, the criminal element (the “bad guys”) will continue to obtain their firearms through means already deemed illegal – but rarely prosecuted. You won’t hear this Administration tell you that these laws don’t touch the criminal, they’ll say they’re addressing the availability of firearms, thereby making it more difficult for a criminal to acquire them by taking them “out of circulation.” Just like “trickle-down” economics… But by restricting legal ownership of firearms (which is patently unconstitutional), they’re actually just making the criminal’s already illegal activities a little bit safer. And that is a fact.

Yes, I know how this reads to this point as rather derivative of the constant stream of rhetoric out of the pro-2A lobby; that’s really not by accident, since these are the more technical and well-publicized points in the debate (which are really not being adequately answered, either). But the “God-given right” of self defense, while being a major part of the rationale behind the 2^nd Amendment and the argument against these unconstitutional gun control laws, is not the only facet in the debate.

The other part that must be addressed, put in its proper place, is the ugly reality that there is evil in the world that we struggle to contain, that we do not want to see.

This is the part that gun-control advocates not only fail to acknowledge, but simply refuse to accept. There is formidable evil in this world that has nothing to do with party affiliation, but they stick their fingers in their ears and whistle so they can’t hear of it, then blame others when it all goes to hell. They refuse to take off their blinders.

Let’s be very clear: There is not a single person in the NRA or any other pro-2^nd Amendment group who won’t admit that there are people out there who shouldn’t possess a dull soup spoon, let alone a semi-automatic firearm. What they will tell you is that it’s these people who need to be the focus of legislation and law enforcement, not the “law-abiding citizen” that poses no threat to anyone, except maybe to those who would do evil.

Sandy Hook was a terrible event, a black day that makes even the coldest heart cry, but the blame was not on his AR-15. The AR-15, remember, is only a tool… No, if we’re going to place the blame where it belongs it lands squarely at the feet of the shooter and his mother, who denied the reality of her son’s mental illness. That denial cost her her own life, and the lives of those children and teachers. Some lands at the feet of the government, for failing to have adequate security measures in place – or for not allowing them.

That latter was particularly evident in Parkland, FL, when a 19-year-old with a documented history of violent mental issues went on a rampage at Stoneman Douglas High School, killing 17 and injuring another 17. That incident showcased a breakdown at virtually every level, over years, from family aid, the foster system, even the FBI failed to act on the red flags. And what protection was there – there was a deputy on site when it happened – did not respond, but hid behind an exterior door…

Sorry – that whole scenario just infuriates me. But it demonstrates how imperfect the real world can be, how evil can triumph when good is hobbled.

The final facet I want to discuss is the least acknowledged facet of all – the political aspect of gun control. Frankly, government is by its very nature inept, and prone to take the least effective and most damaging actions. “Gun control” is no exception. But there is an insidious undercurrent to gun control that must be acknowledged, understood, and addressed.

An unarmed population is easy to control.

So I leave you with two points, one to ponder and one you can act on.

Think about this quote:

Every Communist must grasp the truth, “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” Our principle is that the Party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party.

Mao Zedong

This quote was taken directly out of the “little red book” of Mao Zedong, the first Chairman of Communist China…

And, finally, there is a bill introduced in the House that is a truly “common sense” gun law, and you can push your Representatives to get it passed.

HR 38 is the “Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act.” What it does is establishes a “federal statutory framework” that allows someone with a concealed carry permit in one state to carry a concealed handgun in another state. So if a person has gone through the process, taken the classes and cleared the background check, and is properly licensed to carry a concealed handgun in their home state, that license would be valid in all states; it would basically work the same way a driver license works (although there are a few more restrictions than with a driver license). This bill would actually remove one of the roadblocks the “law-abiding citizen” has to navigate.

I think it’s pretty clear where I stand on this subject, and I hope that I’ve helped clarify it a little for you.