|
I totally agree with both of you. The focus should NOT be on the tool. But it is. My suggestion is not to present for approval two options. They are presented as the only options available to resolve the issue of gun-related crime, which is the focus of the opposition to guns.
Total removal of guns is one option. But it is not likely to happen simply because it is a Constiutional right. I put it there because the gun opposition would love to see it happen but it is simply not likely in these United States.
That leaves option two as the only viable avenue to reduce, then eventually stop, killing BY GUNS. It will not stop the killing of human beings. Evidence of this is apparent in the United Kingdom, where guns were replaced by knives.
The effort to eliminate guns by the left has nothing to do with concern over the death of one's fellow man. It is a historic effort by those in pursuit of political power to disarm the populace to prevent their eventual overthrow by insurrection.
The"Woke"phenomenon cannot survive in the face of an armed private population.
Those of you who argue we should not focus on the tool - well, the death penalty does not focus on the tool. We should go to the conference table with the attitude that we, the law-abiding gun-owning community, are willing to put ourselves at risk of death if we violate the law with our guns, and we're secure in our position because we know WE are not the problem. But we DO insist that those in our society who violate our safety with a gun should be removed from our existence. Let's see what the "progressives" do with that.
|