It’s not a gun-control debate, it’s a mental-healthcare debate

There’s no way to escape the great debate about guns in the wake of the recent Connecticut shooting. So be it. It is certainly a heart-wrenching tragedy and therefore the knee-jerk reaction of the national consciousness is on “tighter gun control”. The politicians are promising “meaningful legislation” and a lot of other hot-air bullshit. Why is it hot-air? Because they are doing what they do best: pandering to the public on whatever happens to be the controversial news topic of the day in a way that does absolutely nothing to improve the situation, but rather could make things worse. This tragedy is an excuse for them to act fast to pass legislation they otherwise could never pass. It is a publicly-stated mantra of the Obama Administration to “never let a crises go to waste”.

No matter where you come down on the idea of personally-own guns or gun control laws and all the rest, I ask you indulge me on this one.

The first argument I have to make has to do with the idea of banning “assault weapons”. First, try to define what an “assault weapon” is. Anything used to injure another person, be it a gun, a knife, a screwdriver, a rock, can be defined as an “assault weapon”. It’s the law makers who define this term arbitrarily. So let’s be more specific: the call is to ban automatic and semi-automatic rifles, but truthfully: what good will this do for anyone? The previous “assault rifle” ban lasted from 1994 to 2004 under President Clinton. Columbine school massacre still occurred during this “assault rifle ban”, didn’t it?

Before I continue, I’d like to make it clear I agree with such a ban as I can’t see any reasonable purpose for anyone other than the military and police to have possession of an automatic or semi-automatic rifle. But I also understand many own guns for leisure or hobbyist purposes beyond self defense and the rest.

Let’s substitute VHS Video Cassettes for guns. Banning those VHS cassettes containing a certain genre of movie on them simply prevents the legal first-sale of them. What about the millions of these same VHS cassettes already out in the “wild”, privately owned? Banning them does nothing whatsoever other than prevent those who tend to always remain within the law from legally buying them. There is no law against owning them, or reselling them.

The rest of my diatribe is here.