Gabrielle Giffords has decided to continue her push for stricter gun control. While this isn’t surprising I found here justification for more gun control rather interesting:
The Arizona Democrat, who was shot in the head in a 2011 attack that killed six people, said too many children were dying in shootings.
Giffords claims to want stronger gun control legislation to protect the children from gun violence. In order to accomplish her goal she intended to have violent people with guns threaten nonviolent people with guns. I still can’t wrap my head around the idea of gun control. How can one claim to oppose gun violence while at the same time advocate for people with guns to use violence to enforce gun control legislation? It truly is mind boggling. We’ve seen the results of prohibitions before. During the time alcohol was prohibited state and non-state organized crime increased. The current war on drugs, likewise, has lead to an increase in state and non-state organized crime. Why does anybody think a prohibition against firearms is going to be any different?