Shining some light on a darker issue…
I have been trying to understand some political issues from the conservative side. I recently watched a documentary on Netflix called "Targeted." It spells out many ideas held by pro-gun groups (gun enthusiasts?).
It was very educational. The most important idea I came across is that pro-gun people believe that our right to bear arms is a way to keep the government in check. If citizens have guns, the government cannot overtake us. I heard – if the government makes all the rules, they get all the guns. If the government disarms us, it is a way to gain control over the people. I heard – there is no "gun control" – there is only "people control."
So I am understanding that pro-gun groups consider gun restrictions as limiting their power to keep the government in check. I can follow the logic, though I don't understand why some limits are offensive. What's wrong with background checks? What's wrong with keeping guns out of the hands of people with mental illness or past criminal behavior?
Another point that seems valid is when I heard – gun restrictions don't keep guns out of the hands of bad guys. If criminals want guns, government restrictions are not going to stop them. I'm guessing most of the guns used by drug dealers and such are obtained illegally.
I learned that the appeal of the right to carry concealed weapons is that it puts uncertainty into the minds of criminals. If the neighbor on the street can pull a gun to stop a crime, it may be less likely the crime will be committed.
So, now I feel I understand pro-gun people a little better. I still think gun restrictions are a good thing – guns are not being eliminated. We are still a long way from reducing gun violence in our country. But maybe the two sides, pro-gun and anti-gun, can cooperate to find ways to stop criminals. Being understanding and respectful of people with opposing views is the only way to promote compromise and cooperation.
I have been trying to understand some political issues from the conservative side. I recently watched a documentary on Netflix called "Targeted." It spells out many ideas held by pro-gun groups (gun enthusiasts?).
It was very educational. The most important idea I came across is that pro-gun people believe that our right to bear arms is a way to keep the government in check. If citizens have guns, the government cannot overtake us. I heard – if the government makes all the rules, they get all the guns. If the government disarms us, it is a way to gain control over the people. I heard – there is no "gun control" – there is only "people control."
So I am understanding that pro-gun groups consider gun restrictions as limiting their power to keep the government in check. I can follow the logic, though I don't understand why some limits are offensive. What's wrong with background checks? What's wrong with keeping guns out of the hands of people with mental illness or past criminal behavior?
Another point that seems valid is when I heard – gun restrictions don't keep guns out of the hands of bad guys. If criminals want guns, government restrictions are not going to stop them. I'm guessing most of the guns used by drug dealers and such are obtained illegally.
I learned that the appeal of the right to carry concealed weapons is that it puts uncertainty into the minds of criminals. If the neighbor on the street can pull a gun to stop a crime, it may be less likely the crime will be committed.
So, now I feel I understand pro-gun people a little better. I still think gun restrictions are a good thing – guns are not being eliminated. We are still a long way from reducing gun violence in our country. But maybe the two sides, pro-gun and anti-gun, can cooperate to find ways to stop criminals. Being understanding and respectful of people with opposing views is the only way to promote compromise and cooperation.
