The Inherent Fallacy Of The “Gun Control” Debate
Editor’s Note: Be warned this post is a deviation from the world of sport. Normally I strive to avoid politics on this blog, but because ESPN decided to fill my morning SportsCenter with coverage of a gun control rally, it’s time to point out what’s really wrong with this entire issue.
A while back in the aftermath of the mass murder at Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school in Florida, my blog brother from another mother SportsChump posted a piece about guns in America. The Chump and I were actually born on the exact same day more years ago than either of us may care to admit, we are both bloggers and sports fans, but the similarities stop there. For example, he’s a bartender. He’s “John” from the Billy Joel song “Piano Man;” he’d probably get me my drinks for free. He’s also quick with a joke or to light up your smoke…when you could still smoke in bars anyway. In contrast, I was a bouncer. I’m the behemoth who after you did something stupid escorted you to the parking lot by opening the door with your face.
But for purposes of this conversation, the important difference between us lies in our politics. The Chump will be the first to admit he tends to lean leftward, whereas I’m slightly to the right of Genghis Khan. Despite that, and despite the polarized, divided nature of this country, we still manage to agree on things. The current gun debate in America is one of those cases. It was while I saw coverage of yesterday’s “March For Our Lives” on one of the cable-sludge-news outlets that I had an epiphany.
Honestly, as I’m watching the “March For Our Lives,” as far as it being some sort of instrument of social change, it’s making about as much sense as “Days Of Our Lives.” All I saw was a self-congratulatory, self-absorbed drama-fest; a gargantuan “look at me” exercise in virtue signaling. Then it hit me. The reason why this display didn’t connect with me has everything to do with why the Chump and I can see eye-to-eye. We are taking an intellectually honest approach with the goal being a workable and effective solution. It was after I re-read his post that I realized Chump has this nailed.
I’m not here to tell you not to own a gun. Our Constitution grants you that right. What it doesn’t give you is the right to kill someone in cold blood, senselessly and violently.
The problem with yesterday’s “March For Our Lives” is I saw a lot wanting to take away a Constitutional right from law-abiding citizens, and worse yet, wanting to do so in an anti-constitutional way. Am I the only one who is noticing that nobody in the “gun control” movement ever mentions dealing with the Second Amendment in the constitutionally described manner? I don’t care what sort of high moral ground you claim, and I don’t care what part of the constitution you are after, the minute you start talking about circumventing the law of the land in order to advance a political agenda, you become a far greater threat than any gun could hope to be. You’re a tyrant waiting to happen.
That second sentence about not having a right to kill people is precisely why I refuse to use the term “mass shooting.” Killing innocent people for no appreciable reason is an act of mass murder committed by a terrorist. Being more concerned about the particular tool used to kill inherently means there’s something more important to you than the lives of innocent people. That makes you part of the problem.
Allow me to clearly state for the record that we are ALL to blame for the lack of constructive dialogue. Until that impasse is resolved, these senseless acts will continue and expound. Regurgitating statistics on gun violence to support one side or another resolves nothing. I humbly present the only statistic that matters. One shot kid at a school is one shot kid too many.
Once again, Chump is right on the button, and there’s a couple of reasons why. First of all, the fact is that the so-called “gun debate” is a prison of binary thinking. Each side has their trenches dug, the landmines laid, and its a stalemate with no hope of resolution. The reason why it is is simple; we’ve made the debate into something which it isn’t. Preventing mass murders in schools isn’t about guns; it’s about security. These attacks keep happening because instead of talking about workable solution to keep kids from being murdered, we make it about political agendas.
But more importantly, there’s a fundamental flaw in the “gun control” argument: it will never work. Even if the second amendment were repealed, there’s already eleventy bajillion guns in this country. Heroin is also illegal to possess in this country, and yet we are in the middle of an opoid epidemic in this country. The ugly reality is that gun laws only exist to make anti-gun people feel like they’ve accomplished something, when in fact they have not. You can disagree with me politically all you want; you can call me any name you want. It won’t change the fact that we already have a ton of gun laws in this country; the very existence of “March For Our Lives” is a testament to their inefficacy.
Carried to their logical conclusion, the “gun control” crowd can only really make their approach into a solution by one means; outright confiscation. Not only could the government never find all the guns in this country and with no border security, a gun ban would simply create a gigantic “black market.” But the worst part is the minute anybody attempts a mass confiscation of guns in America, it’s very likely the result is a revolution and a civil war unlike anything the world has ever seen.
In other words, if you think a good way to get rid of mice in your house is to burn it to the ground, you have the perfect mindset for the “gun control” crowd. But regardless of what side you’re on, if you look at the phrase “gun violence” and you see “gun” as the problem…well, in fact YOU are the problem. That’s because if you think guns are the problem, or you’re so locked into that debate you can’t be bothered to have a conversation which addresses the real issue.
The bottom line is America doesn’t have a gun problem, it has a violence problem. Guns don’t kill people, people who want to kill people do. Just this past week, there was a guy in Texas killing people with bombs hidden in packages. It’s easy to blame guns, because that means none of us have to ask the uncomfortable question: Why do we have a society which produces homicidal sociopaths, and what to do I have to do to change that?
I’m pretty sure marching with a sign that says “Kill the NRA” isn’t the answer.
E mail the most interesting independent sports blog on the web at dubsism@yahoo.com, and follow us @Dubsism on Twitter, or on our Pinterest, Tumblr, Instagram, Snapchat, and Facebook pages.
About J-Dub
3 comments on “The Inherent Fallacy Of The “Gun Control” Debate”
Drop Your Comments Here
The Man Behind Dubsism
Dubsism on Pinterest
Click On JoePa-Kenobi To Feel The Power Of The Jedi Photoshop Trick. Besides, you can get the best sports-related recipes ever. This is the sports-related content you are looking for.
Blog Directories
Dubsism 
You and I would make for a mean ticket, brother.
Please tell me once elected that we can put a disco ball in the Oval Office.
Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeease!
And they thought Clinton wrecked shit.
LikeLike
And we gotta stop agreeing on things. People are gonna start talking.
LikeLike
Right on the money. This is what you were talking about in one of your podcasts three years ago (after that South Carolina shooting).
LikeLike