This article is going to center around the United States’ political climate. Apologies to readers from other countries, but I have to focus on what I know for this topic.
Gun control is a controversial topic. For some it’s a nonstarter, for others it’s a necessity. For me, it’s a cause of internal conflict.
Allow me to explain. I am a liberal. I read liberal news, I vote for liberal (Democratic Party) candidates and I write liberal articles. But I support the second amendment, which is a very nonliberal stance.
Why is that? I’d like to think it’s in part because I’m an independent thinker. I don’t blindly follow the belief of others with whom I normally agree. I do believe that limiting access to weapons would decrease the mass shootings that currently plague American life. But at what cost?
At times soured by our political leaders, I fear a shift from democracy to dictatorship. I acknowledge this fear is largely irrational, and that American institutions (read: the military) would not allow this to happen. Both liberals and conservatives believe in liberty and freedom, which runs contrary to dictatorship, so nobody in the current political system would allow this to happen.
But perhaps a day will come when the environment is more suited to a president remaining in power past his (or her) two term limit. I hope not, for the country’s sake. If that day does come, it would be time for Americans, liberal and conservative, Democrat and Republican, to take up arms against the government in keeping with our second amendment right. If law abiding citizens do not have weapons, they cannot defend themselves against a government without their best interests at heart.
But the conflict remains, though it seems like it would end there.
I really do believe, as I said before, limiting weapons access would prevent mass murders. I’ve heard the argument that law abiding citizens armed with guns would do so as well, but that idea feels reactionary to me. I don’t like the idea of waiting until a shooting is taking place to act to end it. In the time it takes for a law abiding citizen to register a threat and act to terminate said threat, the gunman may have already taken at least one life. That’s one life too many.
So at the end of the day, I support limited, or “common sense” gun control. I believe in universal background checks, and mandatory psychological evaluations. I support accountability for parents whose guns were used by their children in school shootings. I do not believe in banning so-called assault rifles, or semi-automatic weapons. If we don’t have those, we will stand no chance against an oppressive government.
What do you think? Am I nuts? Did I overlook something? Agree or disagree, I'd love to hear what you think in the comments, my only request is to maintain a sense of civility.
