Laughable arguments against gun control
The arguments made by some writers against improved gun control are so far off-base they’d be laughable in any other context. I am a “law-abiding citizen,” as are many gun owners. To protect me, these worthies want to assure my right to “keep and bear” all the assault rifles and ammunition my little heart desires. They tell me that “the first step to tyranny” is any reasonable restriction on weapons for which no private person really has a need.
They claim it has been proven that the highest incidence of violent crimes occurs in places that have the strictest gun control laws. Where, I ask, has it been “proven”? In Canada, which has among the toughest gun control laws, and where the annual death toll to guns is about 50 souls? Even though Canadian per capita gun ownership pales in comparison to that of the United States, amazingly, there have been very few reports of Canadian government forces “kicking down the doors” of their “law-abiding citizens.”
Then there’s the writer who compares ferry boats, hammers and automobiles to guns. Ferry boats and cars transport people, hammers pound nails, and those items were created for those purposes. Assault rifles are created to kill as many people as possible, as quickly as possible. Somehow, I think it might be reasonable to limit their use.
Angelo F. Coniglio