FEATUREDLIFE STYLE

Gun Violence. Is there such a thing?

Naturally, when people say that people kill other people, they are acknowledging the fact that a bullet fired from a gun is responsible for the death of a person. The underlying tenet of that statement is that human decision-making controls and manipulates firearms as inanimate objects. This is the sentiment that conveys the meaning of the statement.

Light switch analogy.

By employing the phrase “gun violence,” the Left and others of a similar nature are planting public apprehension, despite being well aware that firearms are mere objects and cannot thus inflict harm—unless manipulated. Consider a light switch: unless it is turned on, the light will not illuminate, and the same applies to a firearm; the firearm will not fire unless controlled. Thus, in truth, even a person with low intelligence will agree that guns are not vicious—people are vicious.

Crack cocaine analogy.

Take, for instance, the quote, “Guns do not kill people.” Both “people do” and “crack does not induce addiction; crack addicts do” are considered to be synonymous. Guns don’t magically slay people, and crack isn’t magically addictive. In the same way that someone chooses to melt down and inject it, someone else chooses to pull the trigger on the gun. If I have crack in my pocket and pass 100 people on the same day, nobody will become addicted to crack because I’m not giving them crack to shoot up. In the occasion that I am carrying a firearm and walk by one hundred people, I will not shoot any of them because–I will not shoot them.

[dropshadowbox align=”center” effect=”lifted-both” width=”auto” height=”” background_color=”#ffffff” border_width=”1″ border_color=”#dddddd” ]Nothing can occur unless a person takes action. content here. Drugs do not lead to addiction in any way. Firearms do not cause violence. Alcohol does not cause car accidents. Theft did not occur because of money.  This list is endless. The root cause of society’s problems is people and their own free will. As a result of the fact that it is impossible to know when someone will engage in a criminal act, laws were enacted so that society could punish those individuals who violate our societal rules.[/dropshadowbox]

Phone threat analogy.

What would happen if someone made a threat through Verizon’s network? Would Verizon be responsible for the threat, or would the individual be responsible for the threat? Clearly, the person making the threat should be punished, not Verizon; however, if you had the opportunity, you would like us to believe that Verizon was to blame for the threat.

Phone app analogy.

One can gain insight into the issue of widespread firearm proliferation by envisioning a speculative situation wherein each citizen of the United States awoke to discover that an application on their smartphones, whenever accessed, inflicted fatal wounds on any individual in the vicinity.

The overwhelming majority of us would abhor such an application. Immediate removal from our mobile devices would be our top priority. It is highly improbable that we would ever employ the application to cause death. But unfortunately, some would! To put it simply, evil will perpetually exist and cannot be stopped. Contrary to popular belief, there are unbreakable natural laws that govern our world, such as up, down, forward, back, good, and evil.

Israel, October 7th, 2023.

According to Reuters, the Minister for Police, Itamar Ben-Gvir has predicted that this war could see a repeat of the 2021 unrest and has ordered an easing of regulations for issuing gun licenses to private citizens. These generally require applicants to have served in the Israeli military, from which most Arabs are exempt.

An additional measure has been the setting up of volunteer security squads to patrol the streets and back up police. Shabtai said 527 such squads have been created since October 7.

Why does Israel provide its citizens with firearms? The 7th of October, 2023, is a valid reason to arm citizens. There was an outbreak of chaos and the slaughter of hundreds of Israelis as a direct result of the enemy’s realization that a large number of Israelis were easy targets.

Educate, not regulate.

It may be time to educate students about the consequences that can result from the careless use of a firearm when it is used. Motivate students to realize that the careless use of a firearm can result in death by shocking and awing them. Qualify them to visualize (with video) the bloody aftermath of a gunfight.

In agreement with many other gun manufacturers, I believe that the safety of firearms ought to be a primary concern and that students ought to be taught about gun safety while they are still in high school.

I remember that when I was a child, my uncle would show me the terrible consequences that could result from a bullet fired from a gun, and his demonstrations were the most influential ones. I recall that he would do this. He would arrange watermelons in a line and give me instructions on how to shoot each one. When I was in his presence, he would ask me, “Imagine if the Mellon was your head.” Although his examples genuinely frightened me, I continue to have a healthy respect for all types of firearms and living beings.

When I was in school, I remember that during driver’s education, students were required to watch several videos that depicted horrific accidents. These videos were created to discourage drivers from driving recklessly, and I am pleased to report that this strategy was successful. Having the opportunity to witness the slaughter of human beings was both horrifying and unsettling.

Drunk Drivers. 

If a drunk driver gets behind the wheel of a vehicle and causes the tragic death of a family of four, who is responsible for the tragedy that they have suffered? Who is at fault—the person who is intoxicated, the vehicle, or the alcoholic beverage manufacturer? As a result of the fact that the drunk possesses free will, most people are quick to point the finger of blame at the drunk, and this is justified! And the same ought to be true for firearms.

No law will stop a determined individual.

We have thousands of laws, including those pertaining to firearms, in place. Every person who has committed a mass shooting has broken a big number of them. What is the most effective way for one more person to stop the guy? If breaking ten laws is not sufficient, if there were eleven laws, would that be enough to stop him? No. What if there were twelve laws? Would that be sufficient to prevent him from doing what he is doing?

Why not institute legal proceedings against Hollywood? 

The entertainment industry is to blame for the continued occurrence of violent acts that involve the use of firearms. Through several films, such as John Wick and Die Hard, Hollywood glorifies the use of firearms in violent situations. Stop praising the act of purchasing firearms if you want there to be fewer of them, and stop media outlets like Hollywood from celebrating acts of violence that are committed with firearms. This is logic, not defiance of it.

Why no mass shootings at gun shows? 

Many (if not all) vendors are armed, and offenders commonly target the defenseless. If they were to “shoot up” a gun show, their life expectancy would drop by a significant amount, and many shooters aim for locations that present the least potential for resistance.
Several years ago, a man entered a local gun store, pulled out a firearm, and then proceeded to announce that he was going to rob the establishment. Not only were there three employees who were all armed, but there were also two police officers who were off duty and also armed who were present in the store. Before collapsing and passing away, the villain was able to make it ten feet outside the door before he collapsed. According to the report from the coroner, there were seventeen bullets in his body.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *