I’m following up on yesterday’s rants. When I said that you wouldn’t see what I said yesterday anywhere else, it’s because no politician or political pundit on TV or radio or the internet can say it. It would be suicide both financially and politically for them. I don’t take or make any money for this blog. For anyone else to say 6 kids per year is an acceptable risk that doesn’t require restrictions on our rights would be suicide because we’re all hypocrites.
However, let’s consider what risks we all take every day. We all get in our cars every day even though I’m guessing that between 50 thousand and 100 thousand people, including kids, are killed in auto accidents every year. That’s a far greater risk than kids being shot in mass school shootings . However nobody is saying we need to eliminate cars. Anyone who did would be considered nutty.
Likewise, one jet crash per year would kill way more people than school shootings, but no one says we need to outlaw air travel. We accept this risk as a part of life. A significantly greater number of high school and college students die from binge drinking than die from school shootings. This is another risk that we all willingly accept, maybe subconsciously, but none of us are seriously calling for prohibition again.
I have no doubt that more high school and college students died last year from the Tide pod challenge than from school shootings, yet no one is calling to ban laundry detergents. I’m sure I could list a lot more.
The point of this is that life involves assumption of risks that we all willingly accept. Only one of these risks involves a constitutional right, the second amendment. And this is the one the left focuses on because the left really wants to get your guns.
Now I want to make clear that I am not a gun person. My family is not a gun family. My father was part of the invasion of Omaha Beach and thus I assume used a gun to kill someone. He never said so and I never asked. However, there was never a gun in our house and he never was a hunter. I shot a 22 rifle in Boy Scouts and that was the extent of my involvement with guns until about four years ago when it occurred to me that I lived alone and that my front door was only about five steps from my bedroom. Interestingly, when I took a lesson after getting the gun, the instructor told me that criminals are very wary of senior citizens because we have no delusions about other options and will shoot first and ask questions later. I have a black belt in karate and I am not foolish enough to think I could do anything but shoot.
When I was playing golf today with my across the street neighbor and told him about the odds, and I’m pretty sure from things he’s said previously that he leans left, his response was that one kid dying was unacceptable. I said I’m not a gun advocate and he said he was, but that the problem could be solved without going after guns. His suggestion was that we should harden schools. I suggested that the left won’t support this and he poo pooed it. However, yesterday on The Five when a similar idea was put forth, Juan Williams opposed it because he was concerned that kids might end up with criminal records because of what now might be considered normal adolescent behavior.
Moreover, my problem is with the cost and with the slippery slope towards a police state. I keep hearing that there are many trained former military and retired police officers who could be used. How many millions or billions of dollars a year are you willing to spend for six lives?
I will close with this point. There is only one time when a politician can say a single life isn’t worth upending everything, and it’s only available to Dems. When an illegal alien felon kills Kate Steinle, Obama and the left can ignore it because supporting illegals is more important than protecting citizens and the MSM agrees.
By the way, I don’t see any need for automatic or semi automatic rifles. How freaking many times are you going to shoot a deer? However, I believe the second amendment protects your right to this nonsense.