I have no interest in the gun “debate.” Debate is in quotes because, let’s be honest, it’s no more a debate than jerking yourself off is “getting laid.”
No, this isn’t a debate, and I don’t have any interest in pretending it is. Instead, I thought I would do my gun-loving readers some advice on what arguments not to use, and I’ll close it with the argument that is sound.
Don’t bring up the second amendment. For one thing, I see people who don’t even believe in government trying to invoke a government protected right. For another, it doesn’t matter what’s in the Constitution today, because the Constitution comes equipped with the means of being changed. There are supposed to be changes, there are supposed to be improvements and adjustments for changing situations. Then again, a lot of these people also see no problem with fighting a violent rebellion over not changing the Constitution… even when it comes to owning people.
Another stupid argument is the “if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns” argument. Right, well… by this logic, we shouldn’t outlaw rape or murder, because then only outlaws will rape and murder. If your point is that if you make something illegal, people will still do/want it, then you’re missing the whole point. What’s worse, you’re putting stupid ideas into people’s heads, like the idea that guns should be outlawed. If someone suggests gun control, you shouldn’t suggest outlawing guns completely… it makes you look as dumb as you probably are.
Let’s see, what else… oh, then there’s the “rebellion” argument. You know, how we need guns in case the government ever becomes tyrannical (or because it apparently is, in the eyes of alarmists). Because clearly, if the government ever did actually become tyrannical (as opposed to providing healthcare), you would surely be able to fend off stealth bombers dropping bombs on you from 40,000 feet with handguns, and your assault rifle is really going to chip the paint of their tanks.
A slightly more refined version of the above is the belief that America’s high gun ownership (which isn’t really that high, to be honest) is the reason America hasn’t been invaded since 1812. It’s certainly not the fact that no other country from our hemisphere has been at war with us since way back then – you know, then, back in 1812, when Canada whipped our ass and burned Washington DC… during a war we started. No one invades us for the same reason no one has invaded Antarctica: no one would want to win. I can’t say I blame them, I wouldn’t want to govern us, either.
The argument that takes the statistically inaccurate cake (one of the least popular of all cake flavors, behind only the urinal variety) is the claim that guns make you safer. The statistics just don’t add up on this. A gun you own is several times more likely to hurt you or a relative than an intruder. There are more accidental child gun deaths in a month than there are criminals shot by homeowners in a year. There is literally nothing to suggest owning a gun will make you less likely to be the victim of a home invasion or violent crime, and millions of guns every year are stolen.
There’s so many more stupid arguments in favor of gun ownership, probably as many as there are stupid people who own guns, but there’s only one that is valid: you should be allowed to own something that you can use responsibility. If you don’t have a real, concrete reason for owning a gun, why are you letting yourself be convinced by the gun industry that you need to purchase an overpriced hunk of metal that will probably just collect dust in your home?