Guns and Apples

I can't take it anymore! I'm listening to The Connection and the debate about gun control, and I need to spill my opinions somewhere before I burst--or start yelling at the radio loud enough to cause my co-workers to wonder (more than they already do). In light of the recent rash of killings in Minnesota, in Wisconsin, and too many other states, a conversation on gun control makes perfect sense. It does not, however, make sense that in light of people dying that State Representative Scott Gunderson would want to pass legislation in Wisconsin making it legal to carry concealed handguns (visit the Wisconsin Concealed Carry Association for details about its crusade). Wisconsin is only one of four sane states that doesn't have such already have such a law; it's one of my favorite facts about WI that I like to flout in front of East Coasters (and West Coasters--and Washington D.C. dwellers) who view the entire middle of the country as a barbaric waste land (yes, lots of you do, don't deny it). "Look!" I cry, "You can't lump the entire middle of the country together. Boarding an ocean doesn't make one state superior to another. We're not all gun-toting, anti-evolution, homophobic hillbillies! Look at Wisconsin!"

Don't take that away from me!

But what I really want to respond to is Gunderson's argument which rests upon the NRA slogan: Guns don't kill people, people kill people. People--young men, especially--influenced by violent video games, violent movies, "things" on TV. I'm not going to argue that there isn't excessive violence in the media--there is tons! But the generations raised during world wars and spaghetti westerns, Korea, Vietnam--where those children raised on less violence? Gunderson talks about the need to regulate such violent content, but heaven forbid such regulation extend to gun ownership! "That's for families to decide."

WHAAA?

Never mind that most gun deaths result from suicides and homicides of people known--i.e. family members--and not "criminal elements." Gunderson attempts to make a distinction (a gulf the size of... well, The Gulf) between such crimes and the violent outbreaks such as school killings. But it's all the same in the end. People, upset, killing other people. "Normal" people who could easily pass an screenings to get a gun "for protection." And for many, protection is their original intent, I'm sure. But later, during a heated argument, during a bout of depression, the gun is an all too easy argument ender, an easy out.

I could argue statistics all day--and so could Gunderson. But less guns cannot be worse than more guns. It just can't.

In the end I don't know what makes me madder, Gunderson's proposed legislation, or the faulty logic he applies pel-mel as the situation dictates. The hypocrisy of opposing beliefs that he doesn't even attempt to apologize for. It's just ridiculous. I don't want people like that toting guns.