Photo Credit: Public Domain
The most sickening ritual we repeat over and over in this country is the debate with the National Rifle Association (NRA) and pro-gun Republicans on one side and decent people who want to stop mass murders resulting from the easy access to deadly weapons of mass destruction on the other. These debates take place after every single gun massacre in America, and the outcome is always the same: The NRA and pro-gun Republicans end up passing laws making it even easier for anyone in this country to obtain weapons to commit mass murder, instead of harder.
So, let’s just skip that worthless debate after the largest mass shooting in American history—this one murdering 58 Americans and wounding nearly 500 more in Las Vegas. Instead, let’s start with one thing about guns all Americans can agree upon. I’m serious. There actually are such things.
Here’s the one I would suggest: No one in this country should be able to shoot 550 people at a time.
The beauty of starting with that proposition—and I dare anyone to offer a rational argument explaining why he or she would disagree—is that it wipes out nearly all of the lame justifications for failing to act after every American gun massacre.
What about the Second Amendment? Well, what about it? When the Second Amendment was adopted in 1791 in the age of blunderbusses, there were no guns capable of shooting 550 people at a time. To do so back in 1791 would have taken months—not the 10 minutes Stephen Paddock shot into a crowd of thousands of country music fans.
The ‘Well-Regulated Militia’
The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution begins with words explaining its intent to maintain “a well-regulated militia.” Even the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia agreed that the “well-regulated” part meant gun rights were not unlimited, and government could pass appropriate regulations. A government allowing the shooting of 550 people at a time is a lousy regulator.
|
|
Preventing the shooting of 550 people at a time also takes away the argument that somehow the ability to wipe out enormous numbers of people is necessary for individual gun owners to protect themselves in their homes.
Recently, a totally unprincipled politician succeeded in winning the presidency by fabricating outrageous lies designed to stir widespread fear of immigrants of other races and religions. But not even that shameless liar dared suggest his supporters needed to fend off 550 Latino gang members and Muslim terrorists storming their homes to rape and kill their families.
And all those worries about a zombie apocalypse? That show is totally made up. Even if it could happen, zombies lurch around slowly.
Nobody needs the $200 little “bump stock” doodad Paddock used to convert his semiautomatic rifles to fire like machine guns—100 rounds in seven seconds, according to an internet ad. Preventing anyone from shooting 550 people at a time exposes the silliness of other arguments about why intelligent gun regulations don’t work. If Paddock didn’t have his guns, he could just kill people with a knife or even a rock. Good luck stabbing 550 people at a country music concert. With a rock, you’d be lucky to hurt more than one.
OK, but what about people who have no intention of hurting anyone? They just collect guns that can shoot 550 people at once as a hobby or for target practice. Well, they’re just going to have to find a more acceptable hobby. Stamps and coins are nice.
Even the NRA and its Republican political hostages seemed to realize their arguments against meaningful gun regulations didn’t make sense any more after the shooting of 550 people at one time. For a fleeting moment, the NRA even appeared willing to consider regulating that deadly little doodad. Not a single gun, mind you, and certainly not any of those military assault weapons Paddock amassed: weapons specifically designed to kill large numbers of human beings during warfare that have no legitimate purpose in civilian life. Those weapons already were capable of killing 550 people at once. Paddock’s little doodad just sped up the process.
The NRA’s brief support for regulating bump stocks turned out to be fake. The NRA opposes any federal law prohibiting use of those deadly devices. It will just let its friends in the Trump administration regulate them “differently.” Of course, that also means the NRA’s pet politicians can reverse government restrictions at any time. The NRA’s real fear is a “slippery slope” of sensible gun laws. The NRA is terrified laws passed to prevent the shooting of 550 people at a time could lead to laws preventing the shooting of 400 people, then 200 people and, eventually, even those 20 beautiful children at Newtown.
Let’s all hope the NRA is right for once, and let’s start with all Americans agreeing no one in this country should be able to shoot 550 people at a time.
