One gets sick of hearing conservatives argue with
liberals over gun control, with the liberals coming out of the woodwork to
insist that all guns be confiscated when a shooting incident is publicized in
the press, with videos of the crime running for days after. The likes of such liberals as Geraldo Rivera,
Juan Williams and Bob Beckel always ignore the facts of the debate and argue
emotionally about the deaths, the accidental shootings, the pain and suffering
endured by the families and friends of the victims, and insist that legislation
be fast-tracked to outlaw all guns.
Conservatives wander too far afield in defending the
Constitution on the matter of gun ownership, and liberals will lead them off
into irrelevant territory where nothing is accomplished and tempers are allowed
to flare, leaving both sides seething and emotional. The conversations with liberals should be
carefully contained and the libs should not be allowed to let the conversation
drift into emotional, irrelevant, territory, and they should be constantly
verbally prodded to stay on-subject and not drift afield in an effort to show
us how compassionate they are. I would like conservatives to keep the following
four talking points in mind the next time they get into an argument with a
liberal. The purpose of having these
conversations between left and right is to devise ways to stop crime and
terrorism as soon as they rear their ugly heads, and only quick and decisive
action will do that, not emotive verbiage. The last of these four has become a cliché,
but is still absolutely true and must be brought up in any such argument:
1 1) In
1982 Kennesaw, Georgia passed a law requiring gun ownership by all residents of
the town. Even though the law is not
actively enforced and only about 50 percent of the population actually owns a
gun, the crime rate dropped by eighty-nine percent following passage of the law,
and has remained below the national average since that time.
2 2) The
cities with the most restrictive gun laws have the highest crime rates in the
nation. So restrictive gun laws are not the answer.
3 3) Black
lives matter. Stop black-on-black
killings in the cities having the most restrictive gun possession laws, and the
national killing spree will drop significantly.
But this approach would require blacks to insist that the liberal Democrat
mayors of Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit and New York City, among others, do something
about young black men killing each other, and that’s not likely to happen.
4 4) When
guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.
A cliché, but true nonetheless.
Having guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens
inhibits the crazies from using weapons of their own, and if criminals or
terrorists do launch attacks, the legal weapons will stop them quickly, whereas
having no weapons is no deterrent at all.
The Charlie Hebdo slaughter in Paris proved this point, with unarmed
policemen being easily and quickly killed by terrorists. We know that armed
policemen are not only a deterrent to crime, but they can forcefully prevent an
attack from spreading to the wider population once an attack is launched.
