The Good, The Bad and the Ugly should have had more Gun Control. That was just ridiculous.*

Okay, sometimes I like to comment on events that are going on around me. Mostly because I see them bogging down my Twitter feed with everyone’s mixed rage and I just want to have a say.
I like to post about current events, because no one ever sits and looks at the other opinion’s viewpoint. I would like to think that by me posting about it unbiased as possible, it would provide some prospect for people. Or at least for my handful of followers.

The topic right now that everyone is upset about is Gun Control in the U.S.

First off, it’s always my favorite when people start throwing up statistics like “Oh, the U.S. has had 17 shootings in the last 5 years and the U.K. has only had 4.” (not a real statistic, just an example.)
Yeah, that seems really bad and people go off with the whole “WHAT’S WRONG WITH AMERICA? WHY ARE WE SO HORRIBLE?!”
I think we should all go on a diet right about now, because we need to remember portion sizes when it comes to these statistics. The U.K. is a significantly smaller country than the U.S. I am not talking about politic wise, importance wise or whatever other way you could twist it to be offended. I am talking about size wise we could fit 40 U.K. into the United States. We have about 251 billion more people than the U.K. does and when you have more people, obviously you will have more crime and more problems. That’s just life,
I am just using the U.K. as the example, because people like to compare the two of us like we are super close to each other when we aren’t. Realistically, based on size, the U.S. should only be compared to China or Russia. Which China is communist, they aren’t even allowed to think about guns, so that’s not an accurate comparison either.
I don’t know much about Russia. So, I can’t comment. The point is not to say I am pro having guns just because we are bigger and we can have more shootings, the was that the statistics they put out can be a bit manipulative.

Okay, now if we get really into the whole debate on whether we should have gun control. It seems to me that everyone has these huge opinions about gun control and they all get frustrated that they do not understand the other side (people who are pro having guns). People who are pro gun control can’t seem to understand why someone could be pro having guns when people have been shot.
I would like to clarify.

This whole debate reminds me of the theory of the philosopher Thomas Hobbes (lived in the 1600s in case you were wondering.) Stay with me here.
Thomas Hobbes wrote that when people are in a state of nature, meaning everyone for themselves, everyone is equal in this state of nature. We are all the same. We all have the ability to kill another person to protect ourselves and the ones we love. But the only sense of power and control comes from the ability to defend ourselves.
This state of nature is not a peaceful state to live in, because we are always on the defense. The only reason a person would give up this state of nature is to have peace. The only way to achieve peace is if everyone gives up their weapons and defenses then enters into a contract creating a commonwealth where one person or group will protect them. According to Thomas Hobbes.

So what does that mean? Because obviously we are not in a state of nature.
It means that the issue is not whether we have guns or not. And if those that are pro gun control really wanted to convince those who are pro guns, they would not be arguing about the damage guns have done. Or ridiculing those who are pro guns.
No, they would be reassuring them that “You will be safe without guns.” They would be proposing laws that would make people feel safer without guns. They would be assuring them that if someone breaks into their house and tries to kill their family, it won’t take the police an hour to get there.
If people are going to give up their only defenses/weapons against those around them, they need to be reassured of peace. Because how many people truly trust the government to keep them safe? That’s what this issue is about. Safety.
Then when you think about it, those who are pro gun control want more safety in their schools. Those who are pro guns are looking for more safety and control in their lives.

So really, are they that much of opposing views? You can’t see me shrug.

*Also, I really like the Good, the Bad and the Ugly. Just saying.



One thought on “The Good, The Bad and the Ugly should have had more Gun Control. That was just ridiculous.*

  1. Meh, the debate as a whole gives my arse a headache, much like the rest of politics. You have the more vocal members of the pro-gun crowd (my stupid stateside aunt and uncle included) screaming “DERNT LERT ERBERM TERK ER GERNZ” while the loudmouths in the pro-control crowd compare the US to a country (Home s**t home Britain, of course) that has only shifted to stabbing instead of shooting.* Most of the more sensible participants of the debate, if any, wind up getting drowned out. :|

    * Aside from the few who were somehow allowed rifles legally here despite the ban on guns and questions raised as to the culprit’s mental health. :shock:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s