A lot of arguments on both sides over gun control are long on hooey, but short of facts. If you’re up for a long, thorough post on the matter, read An opinion on gun control, by Larry Correia, who is an actual expert on guns, crime, and gun use. Yes, he gets a bit passionate about the subject, but if you can look past that, there is plenty there to think about, and unlike the majority of the media, he knows what he is talking about, and provides actual statistics and facts to back himself up.
There are no easy answers to any of the questions worth asking in all of this. I doubt anyone came away from this latest “dialogue” with their opinion changed. I’m not sure what we gained, really, except for further glorifying the shooter and thus encouraging the next guy around six months from now.
And perhaps, thanks to David Gregory, exposing just how convoluted the existing gun laws can be. I don’t think he should go to jail for his stupid stunt, but ignorance shouldn’t be an excuse, either. I’m not buying it that he should be excused because he’s a journalist. Isn’t the standard line we hear from journalists about why we should ignore the blogosphere the fact that they are the professionals who don’t mistakes…like this?
I’m just saying: When the people whose job it is to inform the rest of us don’t realize that the items they’re holding would get the average person sent to jail, or don’t realize there’s no such thing as “high capacity ammunition”, isn’t it just possible we’re not getting the full, real story? Could it be they’ve got their own agenda, and we need to be careful listening to them?
It’s my opinion we should question more than we do, and verify when we can. There’s far too much at stake in the world to simply accept everything we’re spoon-fed. Like Mr. Correia’s article. How were those statistics gathered? It’s obvious he has his own biases, though he at least is up front about it. No one should come away from reading his post thinking he’s an impartial pundit. The real danger is when the people who are supposed to be impartial aren’t so forthcoming about their biases.
So it’s up to us to be wary.