If you’re tired of hearing about gun violence just separate the two words
To our non-shooting friends and family members, a question: Which would you ban, gun violence or criminal violence?
It’s a simple question that shouldn’t depend on minutes or even seconds of thinking about it.
Try again: Are you against guns or just gun violence? The two are not related to each other because guns are safe in the hands of people who handle guns securely and protectively, obey the law about their use and don’t use them to hurt anybody intentionally. Criminal violence, on the other hand, can come only from the hands of law-breaking people who can, and will, hurt you. Criminals don’t care who they hurt.
You do have a choice; you can seek to ban guns used by people who don’t want to hurt you or you can ban guns from criminals who don’t care who or what they hurt. Even the family dog.
To extract the word, ‘violence’ from the word ‘gun’ is not what gun control groups want. They don’t want it because it separates good law-abiding people from bad law-breaking people and, as a result, proves that how words are sometimes used can kill not just people but freedoms, too.
From a practical political view, you can use the words ‘gun violence’ to scare some of the people some of the time or you can scare a lot of the people all of the time. To accomplish the latter, the word ‘violence’ helps gun controllers implement banning the former – ‘gun’ – which is the preferred objective of all gun control advocates.
Such groups learned this fait de accompli the hard way after they began calling the NRA the “gun lobby.” The NRA never was and still is not the “gun lobby.” That acronym is typically reserved for industrial groups such as, in the case of the gun industry, the National Shooting Sports Foundation. The National Rifle Association, on the other hand, does not manufacture firearms. They do, however, support, work for, and co-sponsor lots of shooting sports events in which their members participate.
This little lesson on the basics of gun control is offered because among other reasons the 2020 Democrat presidential nominees and their fellow travelers see it as a sort of saving grace to be able to tell their partisan Democratic gun owners that they, the controllers, are not about abolishing guns, just those that belong to Republican gun owners – those zealous “right wingers.”
We recall that anti-AR-15 and AK-47 failed Dem nominee Beto O’Rourke dropped out of the presidential race despite being – or having been – a gun owner (whose uncle left him some guns) with which he trained his own children to use safely. Good on Beto. And drop-out Kamala “When I’m President I will ban weapons of war during my first 100 days in office” Harris. Not to be outdone, both Cory Booker and Joe Biden have losing gun biases, to boot.
Others may fall by the political wayside, as well, leaving one ultra-committed violence-by-gun advocate Michael Bloomberg waiting in the wings snubbing the debate stage because he doesn’t need the stand-up comedy aggravation and carries in his small-of-the-back holster a huge humpty-dumpty caliber checkbook.
The fact is, Horatio, that you and so many other can’t read-all-the-small-type on a ballot initiative handout potential voters: “Besides…I don’t have time to read it or anything else. I’m too busy texting” … are so easily tricked into thinking that any gun is a real killer “in my workplace, in my kids’ school, in my favorite bar, even in a Walmart,” that the only way to stay safe is to do what they’re told by the gun banners: Gun owners are out to kill you. Violently!
Meanwhile, back at Criminal Central…