Are you sure you want to delete this post?
Through the years there have been things that many people have thought would be nice to
get rid of. And they've tried to ban card-playing -- theater -- have instated and rescinded prohibition --
they've writhed and rave religiously-emotionally to the writhing and raving of rock and roll performance --
they've conducted a "defeat
on drugs" for years -- legislated/criminalized prostitution -- and perhaps
with a modicum more mentality than regarding other issues . . . . . advocated gun control.
Unless draconian penalties (such as public burning or torture or amputation) would be imposed on
violators of forbidden, good luck with the forbidding. And even with horrific consequences for this or
that, history reveals that people will still engage in, conduct, commit to, consort with, and even
espouse the forbidden even resulting in massacres of which they are significant massacrees of the
But there should not be "laissez-faire", legislation-less lenience in perhaps any human behaviors that
can have seriously averse effects on others. This would include activities ranging from "deviant"
sexuality (such as sadism) unto international finance (shafting the economic system for the greater
erection of the investment industry's mega-shareholders and executives' millions and other bottom-lines
(including those comprised of white powder).
No sooner than we should allow a civilian to commute in a sherman tank should we allow public ownership
of assault weapons. Or perhaps the next stage of Gun Lobby lunacy will be to up the ante of amendment
guarantee for those who'd want to do target practice with rocket launchers? Even music is subject to
some controls such as its volume within contexts or neighborhoods, etc. Card-control might involve some
sort of constraint of those who would bankrupt themselves (or finance further fun with crime).
There has to be some control of what otherwise could become chaos. Regarding sexuality, consider some
world areas where even child sex ("or you prefer chicken or duck, sir?") is smorgasbord served for the very
rich (and in a couple notorious cases clergy). Regarding shooting, consider so many parts of the Middle East).
Child sexual exploitation is a realm apart from examinations of sexual permissions and parameters and
premises -- yet depending where even in the US, age of consent in one state would be pedofilia in another.
In NY City, late l800s, the age was 12. In other parts of the world biology is manifestation of consent:
puberty. And, of course, through historical eras sexual "adulthood-consent" age has varied vastly. That
l8 is "legal" (thus moral? normal?) is a judgemental construct, not a condition of the organism (or orgasmism)
of concern. But in this case, l8 (or in a couple other states a couple years younger, I think) should be kept
where it's at. (Though we know full well there are myriad "sex-offenders" despite the registry and life-long
And perhaps that's indicative of the gun situation. Enforce whatever prerequisites for ownership, constrain
whatever types of the owned, still there will be owners who will be "projectile-perverts" and through the
"ways and means" obtain whatever turns them on. And there will be among them the psychos who get it
off not just by pulling the trigger, but by offing others -- even children!!!
As for adult sexuality, it could be that our assumption of inherent monogamy, thus matrimony, is perversion.
A perspective of nature reveals variety is not only the spread of genetic benefit, but the spice of life. More
and more we discover (through DNA) that species once assumed to mate-for-life may associate in "marine
or avian marital binary bliss" . . . but fool around on the side too!! Human sexual mores, especially for the
"entitled" is blatant evidence that simply one-to-one sexuality "'til death do ye part"" has been not a biological
manifestation -- rather a matter of economics. Rich enough, thus the ultra, the elite, you could have hundreds
to screw. Yet even the "down-to-earth" of other cultures allow more than one wife. What is a remnant
of polygamy in the Middle East is actually a cultural continuum of the Old Testament Jewish laws of "lie-with"
lenience (including rather astounding incidences of incest, despite "thou shalt not lie with" declarations).
If controlling guns would control guns I'd be all in favor. That various checks and waiting periods are required
for automotive matters or insurance policies etc. exist, surely some equivalent would not be out of line prior
to possession and operation of a municians-vehicle. The point to consider is not, as others have mentioned
on this site, that people are killed by cars, yet we don't consider banning cars. For one thing, cars are really
necessities. But to the point, if the school or theater or shopping center (or whatever venue) assaults and
deaths were being caused by lunatics smashing cars into the premises . . . . . . . .
Readers? Comments? Continuum of the . . . . . . . . . . . . above . . . .. ?