Tuesday, October 10, 2017 – If it were, say, ice cream for example, a parent might tell their child that they don’t “need” more ice cream in their lives because it wouldn’t be “good” for them. That doesn’t stop the kid from wanting more, whether or not he or she doesn’t “need” more. And so it is with guns. Or shoes. Or toys. Or tattoos. Sometimes you just want what you don’t need, especially if someone is trying to take it away from you or in some way stop you from having it if it’s legal to have it in the first place. Bump stocks, for instance. Suddenly, a lot of people that didn’t even know they existed or have ever held one, or seen one, seem to think that you don’t need a bump stock. They’re probably right. But should that stop you from wanting one? Of course not.
Bump stocks have been flying under the public radar for 17 years, though they weren’t the star of any gun show until just 10 days ago. Now, thousands of people want one, even though they don’t need one. Stephan Paddock apparently thought they were cheaper by the dozen so that’s how many he bought, even though in his shooting rampage he likely only used two. Or three or four. We just don’t know yet. However few he needed, he wanted more.
We’ve heard “How many guns do you need?” Or, “You don’t need an AR-15 to kill a deer.” True. But some hunters want two rifles for hunting. Maybe three. Or four, each of different calibers or purpose. Does “want” or “need” really make a difference? If so, why does anybody need more than one TV in their house? Or both a stove and a micro oven? Two toilets instead of just one?
The politics of guns is full of choices. Open carry. Concealed carry. Pistol or revolver? One of each? Or more? A suppressor? A pistol grip? High-cap magazines when one round…or two…or three will get the job done? Why 30-rounders? Why not? Someone, somewhere will want to place limits on how many rounds of ammo or how many guns they think you should have. And they’ll try to pass a law to keep you from having one or two or three or more. If you have more than one gun does that indicate you have evil intentions? If you have only one does that mean you think that’s enough if four armed home invaders break into your house and threaten your wife and children. Why not three guns? Or more. Would more than one make you a good guy with a gun or a bad guy without more than one?
Eventually, someone – Congress, maybe – will decide for you. Should they? Just because they’re there and need to make up laws whether we need more laws or just whether they want to make more laws? Need and want are opposites. Some things you need are good. Some things you want are evil…or are used for evil purposes. Cops carry guns. Are they for good or evil purposes? Do we really need more gun laws? Or does somebody just think we need them when all they want to do is…something. Anything. To make lives better or safer? We think that’s all very confusing because they don’t always know what we need but only what they want for us. Even if we don’t.