Guns and their use is on the minds of just about every American today, as it has been after each of the mass shootings that have assaulted our media airwaves throughout recent years. And like every American, I have my own opinions on the subject and have rules in my household that align with my opinions. But unlike some, I don't believe that everyone should agree with my opinions or live by the rules that I impose upon my own household.
Personally, I'm anti-gun. I don't like them, there's no place for them in my life, and I do not want gun ownership to be normalized in the eyes of my children. As they grow up, I will not knowingly allow my children inside of a household that contains a deadly firearm. Even the most responsible and safety conscious person has a day where they forget to lock their doors, or other accidental mishaps that can endanger my children if there's such an accident regarding gun safety. I also feel that in order to keep a gun safely locked away from accidental usage kind of defeats the purpose of owning a firearm because it's difficult to get to and use in the type of emergency that the gun is there to protect the owner from in the first place.
However, I do think that hunting is a valid use of a firearm and those who choose to engage in that sport (again, not me) should have the right to do so. I also believe in the original intentions of the second amendment being to allow the general populace to protect themselves from a corrupt government or from corrupt representatives of authority such as police officers. The knowledge that the population is capable of rising up and protecting themselves from a corrupt abuse of power is in part what helps keep the powerful from mass destruction. Ok, so they are still capable of mass destruction, but at least they have to be creative and work hard for it in back room dealings and destroying things financially as opposed to sending in armies to use deadly force to oppress the masses.
But there has to be some means of controlling the amount of destruction that the bad guys are capable of inflicting upon innocent victims. This is not a subject I'm particularly educated on so I'm really asking questions here.
Aren't there now technologies that will allow people to protect themselves without killing? I'm thinking along the lines of rubber bullets. The ability to incapacitate an assailant, perhaps even maim, but without the easy capacity to kill that a standard bullet allows? Doesn't a rubber bullet do basically the same thing in an altercation that a regular bullet does, but allows someone who is shot to receive medical treatment and eventually walk away?
In terms of hunting, if an animal is shot with a rubber bullet or tased into submission, a hunter might have a license and have gone through a big hullabaloo to obtain a firearm that only allows for 2 deadly bullets so they can approach the subdued and deliver the kill shot. Bullets would have to be licensed and accounted for, and a hunter could only own a limited number at any given time.
Would bad guys still be able to get their hands on deadly weapons? Yes, of course. But the fewer that are circulating among the general populace means the more difficulty in obtaining them. The guy who steals someones guns and ammunition would get their hands on maiming weapons and have the ability to incapacitate on a massive level, perhaps some would victims would die, but certainly the amount of death would be scaled back.
I don't propose that the problem of weapons being available to bad guys so that the good guys can also have access has a perfect solution. I don't think we can wipe out the ability for bastards to harm other people. But is there something that can be done to at least make it harder? Lessen the destruction? Since perfect isn't available, I guess I'm just hoping for better. Maybe some regulations can be put in place to make deadly bullets harder to come by, incapacitating bullets the norm, and the death tolls from these horrible attacks might remain among the single digits instead of the double digits that have become so common.