Monday, December 17, 2012

Safety logic.

Let us assume that the official stories about the last few shooting incidents are 100% true. That the crimes were committed in the exact ways that the officials involved state that have stated. That all the inconsistencies are just coincidental. That all the similarities are also just coincidence. That everything went down just as they said it did. That all of the reports of a second or third person were false, or misreported.

Then lets look at a few things:

 Since 1 in 17 people in the US (13 million) have a serious or debilitating mental illness (NIMH).


Since the last 3 attempted mass shootings were perpetrated by people with severe mental health or emotional or behavioral issues:


Since the current calls for gun control are to ban "Assault Weapons" because they were used in the last few mass shootings. And no doubt will be used in the future if Something Isn't Done Immediately...

And since those advocating for such controls or bans are claiming that they are out to make the country safer. ("It's for the children!")

One would then surmise that along with an "Assault Weapons" ban, they would support, in addition, the incarceration and or imprisonment of every one of those approximately 13 million people diagnosed with a serious or debilitating mental illness.You know, those who might harbor homicidal thoughts and all.

Perhaps even the euthanization of these (extremely) dangerous people. Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of these people?

I mean, since these people can, apparently at will, purchase of otherwise acquire a deadly "Assault Weapon" with "High Capacity Ammunition Magazines" with which to perpetrate their mass murder schemes. one would think that this would be a good start to keep the rest of us safe....Right? It's not the sportsman who does this, nor the average law abiding citizen, it is the ones with a mental issue, disease, or defect, right? The ones with high level autism, or emotional problems, or others who are, for a time, able to seemingly cope with their issues and be a part of our society...until they snap and become dangerous....You never can tell when the urge might strike them, you know.

I fully realize that few of these people will, actually commit a mass murder, ore even a single murder. But few, if any of the so called "Assault Weapons" will be used for that purpose either.

So along with the weapons ban , in order to make the country safer, we should lock up any of those we already know might have issues and decide to hurt or kill others.

Make things safer in the future, you know. Trampling on a few rights is OK, as long as it saves even one life and all that.....Right?

(No, I am not advocating that we round up or incarcerate (or euthanize) any of these people with mental issues.  I merely brought it up to demonstrate the absurdity of the entire "Assault weapons" ban argument.)

13 million of our fellow citizens with mental disease didn't commit acts of atrocity yesterday. Nor did 40 million gun owners, nor 8 million "Assault Rifles". I don't, for a moment, advocate that we remove the rights of the folks with mental issues, nor do I believe that we should remove the rights of firearms owners....and for the same reasons.


Mark12A said...

We should be careful. The left will identify anyone who wants to return to a constitutional, small government as "mentally ill." Kind of like they did in the old Soviet Union...anyone who was opposed to the Soviet system HAD to be mentally ill, right?

HerrBGone said...

We could start with anyone in public office who signs on to the idea of depriving the law abiding of their right to self defense - an idea that is crazy on it's face. "... deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." Consent revoked.