This weekend, a handful of protestors gathered on the State Capitol steps to oppose stricter gun laws in Louisiana and the U.S. As if that’s what Baton Rouge should focus on right now, while homelessness, poverty and education remain larger issues than the government supposedly taking over our Second Amendment rights this week.
There’s also misguided thinking behind protesting against stronger legislation, despite the fact that larger issues exist.
The argument that seems to stick around is that the belief that good guys with guns stop the bad ones, and I’d like to address that first.
If you’re marching around claiming the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with one, there’s some internalized, cracked-out, Code of Hammurabi living going on in your head.
An eye for an eye was never proper punishment, and acknowledging that involves a deeper look at the true criminality and ideas of justice.
Also, what kind of good guy just happens to carry around a semi-automatic rifle in a non-war zone? Keep in mind this is a weapon engineered to kill as many people as possible without needing to reload.
The basic point people seem to miss is that it’s not fascist to require people to carry out their lives in some kind of safe manner.
The line between safety and government control of an entire people is blurry to some, but that doesn’t mean Louisiana should issue lifetime concealed carry permits and repeal state regulations on semi-automatic rifles.
But that’s just what the state has done since the Newtown shootings. In fact, state legislation around the country has loosened on gun regulation, and that’s more than a little concerning.
However, this is not an unstoppable movement. As evidenced by Sunday’s rally, it’s a handful of angry men looking to stymie another British attempt at reclaiming colonies or something.
If government takeover through legal or illegal means is their main worry, the thought that a couple of men armed with their precious semi-automatic rifles hidden behind their bookcases could do anything about it is ridiculous.
If it’s a robber taking their new plasma television, anything besides an intimidating-looking shotgun is overkill.
And for personal defense, handguns are acceptable. I’ve never heard of a woman pulling out a semi-automatic rifle in a back alleyway to scare off a potential attacker.
I’m sure it would be effective as a scare tactic, but it’s also impractical. The idea is to keep an attacker away from oneself in the first place, which isn’t something gun legislation can help.
It’s time for everyone to accept that semi-automatic weapons and lifelong concealed carry permits are too much to allow.
We need to have truthful conversations about what kind of restrictions make sense instead of getting fired up about minute-to-minute issues and flashpoint rallies.
I’m sure there’s some middle ground between those who are afraid of guns and those with a militia-worthy arsenal in their garages.
Maybe we could start with community shooting range days to increase awareness of gun safety. Alongside that, we could set up teams to evaluate what aspects of guns are necessary for self-defense versus total government dominance.
Whatever happens, greater conversation is our biggest strength. As soon as we put aside fundamental differences and realize others hold viewpoints as justified as our own, we can begin to have fact-based discussions.
And maybe then standing our ground won’t be the most important thing. Maybe we can concede a little bit of it.
Megan Dunbar is a 20-year-old English senior from Greenville, SC.
Shut Up, Meg: Yes. Discussion of rights, not abundance of guns, is the answer!