If you have ever been to a vacation bible school growing up you are well aware of the story of King Solomon and the two women who claimed to be the mother of a child. Both women came before the King pleading their case before wise Solomon until he comes up with a brilliant decision. He orders a sword to be drawn and to cut the child in half thus giving each mother half a child. Now, one might read this in the modern context as an obvious bluff. But I assure you in Iron Age times it was not so. That period of history was sort of like Game of Thrones meets a Quentin Tarantino movie. As the sword drew near, one of the women then pleaded with the King to stop. Let the other woman have her, just do the child no harm. Realizing that only the mother would care for a child like this in order to make that compromise the King awarded the baby to the real mother. Listen to me gun control advocates of America. If you truly care about gun violence against children you are going to have to compromise first. If all you call for is European style gun control then you will accomplish nothing and I can’t help but assume you are like the mother willing to allow the child split in half because you cannot have it all.
Any Action is Compromise to Gun Owners
Those asking why I am putting the burden on gun control enthusiasts to compromise over gun owners should understand the following point. Any action taken on guns requires an immediate compromise of gun owners. Be they extra background checks, waiting times, fees or restrictions on guns, law abiding patriotic Americans will have to compromise something in the next round of legislation. So I need not ask them for anything as any action is a compromise. Many are willing to do it, but not alone. Far too many gun owners feel they have compromised enough and if you want them on board it will require gun control advocates to go first. Gun owners are inherently going to have to compromise, even on matters we don’t think will actually help at all. That is part of the problem with the modern gun debate is that is asks and ask of one side and one side only without demonstrable evidence of effectiveness.
I’ve truthfully only met a handful of gun control enthusiasts who truly understand guns or gun owners. Far too often in the wake of a mass shooting gun owners spend a great deal of time getting talked AT but very little time being talked too. So let me help. There is a small element of gun owners that are unwilling to compromise one iota and in fact, were any additional gun legislation passed they will be standing in a National Wildlife Refuge swinging a dildo and calling the for the murder of LEO in no time.
Now, Dildo Baggins and General Twinkies McHoHo that we remember from the Oregon standoff might very well be principled men, but just misguided as to the threat in my opinion. Many of the gun laws being proposed from training requirements to mental health checks are not a call for armed insurrection. Then, there is a large component of gun owners who refuse to compromise because they feel they have given enough. Particularly those who live in California. They are not going to march on Washington with arms in hand, but they are not going to sign off on the next round of gun control legislation they don’t think will be effective.
The Road to Compromise is Compromise
While there is absolutely no convincing Dildo Baggins and General McHoHo, there is a large swath of gun owners who would be open to something if you could demonstrate its effectiveness. Personally, I fall somewhere in between the categories of we have given enough to prove to me its effective and we can talk. However, I still insist that gun control enthusiasts have to go first. You can’t advocate for European style gun bans all day long and then think you are going to get me with a candy gram for Mongo. Prove to me via legislation that you want nothing more than what you are asking me to sign off on.
Because when I say you compromise first, I don’t mean compromise like the Native Americans where the white man gets all their prized lands and they get smallpox and firewater. I mean you are going to have to demonstrate to me through substantive legislation that you are not seeking European style gun control. Anytime you are talking about modifying an inalienable right the burden is on you to prove your virtue. If you are indeed seeking European style gun control then gun owners of America instantly walk away from the table and nothing gets done. Do you see why you must compromise first if you really care?
Did you catch that? If you care about the children being shot today then you must abandon the calls for European style gun control because the gun owners of America will never accept it. Whereas gun owners might be willing to compromise, we know a smallpox laced blanket when we see one. From national reciprocity to simply stronger enforcement of existing laws, there are tons of pro 2A olive branches you can choose from to bring gun owners to the table. If you are unwilling to do so, then I have to wonder just how much you care about the kids. After all, we just had a mass school shooting yesterday and today all the front pages are covered with the Royal Wedding.
The Cold Hard Truth
It has to be an awkward moment for the gun control advocates screaming in the wake of the Parkland shooting to realize that nothing that is “common sense” for which they have been advocating would have prevented the Santa Fe shooting. Which law apart from a European style gun ban would have prevented a teenager from sneaking his grandfather’s shotgun and handgun into school? Sadly, it reinforces what gun owners have long been saying. Namely, that until we start making soft targets hard targets they will continue to be attacked. There is no legislation that will prevent a school shooting of any sort next week, but making them harder targets to strike will have an immediate impact. I know you don’t like guns in schools, but if you care about the children then it is time to compromise on that fact. Otherwise I’m left to assume you’d rather the next carnage happen so as to achieve your end game.
So there is compromise number 1 offered up to you. Drop the insane opposition to having a few trained and qualified individuals in each school to harden the target. If you want to fund them as police officers then have at it. But no one is asking for every teacher to carry a gun, but I’m willing to bet in every school in America there is a couple of qualified individuals who can close the gap on LEO response time during a school shooting. Don’t give me the “multiple shooters will confuse LEO on where the shooting is taking place” line. Why in the hell would an armed teacher start shooting in the gymnasium if the school shooter is in the cafeteria? Moreover, most of these school shooters are cowards and either pbut one through their own skull or quit when confronted. Chances are there could be no gunfire by the time LEO arrive. For the love of God and the children going to school next week, harden the target today while we take these year long debates on gun control if you actually care for the children. Any reasonable gun control advocate can realize that legislation will take time, years even. I say it again, harden the soft targets where our children congregate today or I can’t believe you really care.
Finally, let’s talk about some other compromises to make. Because again, any action is an instant infringement or inconvenience to gun owners. This whole talk about holding gun manufacturers accountable has to go. That is about ending gun manufacturing in America and even Bernie Sanders said so. That is a sneaky repeal of 2A and unacceptable to gun owners. Next, the insurance requirement is a backdoor to the same end. Less than .01% of guns in America will ever shoot anyone and yet, the payouts on those claims would be astronomical. How much would an insurance provider have to pay for Parkland or Santa Fe? If so, would any insurance provider want to be in the game? Moreover, how is paying for insurance not a poll tax on a constitutional right?
The Path Forward if You Compromise
I know its not popular to talk about compromise in the gun community, but I think my pro 2A credential is pretty legit on this blog. So I’ll bite the bullet and lose a couple of followers as a result. We all know people who shouldn’t have guns in America. What we don’t know is how to keep guns out of their hands and not infringe on the rest of us. Personally, if I could write 2A it would go something like this. “Thou shall not infringe the right to bear arms. That is, unless, you look like a creepy white kid who spends his days living in his moms basement masturbating 12 times a day to kitten videos. Also, if I should “Death to” and you instinctively respond with “America” then you can’t have a gun.”
While those masturbatory habits are totally acceptable for a Marine on post, its a bit excessive for a potential school shooter. When we look back at most of these school shooters we see through the review that many should have seen this coming. I’m open to exploring processes that are effective into finding this out before the shooting and not after. If you as a gun control advocate are willing to compromise first and earn a little trust with gun owners you might be surprised just how willing to listen most of us are. We hate school shootings too you know. If you make this a zero sum game between individual liberty and European style gun laws then brothers, we’ve got a problem because you are taking me to a place where I can’t go.
If you can realize that hardening soft targets is action you can take today then we might have time to have this debate before the next school shooting. If rocks and mini-baseball bats in schools are your solution then it is hard for me to take you seriously. I care about the children who will be lost in the next school shooting and I realize there is no legislation being proposed that would have prevented this last one. I care enough about kids to do something today to save kids next week. Do you? Then, if you can drop the sneaky repeals of 2A then I’m willing to talk and perhaps most gun owners would too save Dildo Baggins and General McHoHo. Any action you take on guns will require compromise on my part. I’m willing, but I’m not trading liberty for firewater and smallpox. The list of compromises the pro-gun control crowd can offer up are endless, the only question is if they truly care enough to do so. If we each give a little and take a little we might actually “do something.” If your solution is simply for gun owners to give more and more, then well, Bea Arthur’s panties wishes you a good day but we are pretty much done here.
Join the Unprecedented Mediocrity Facebook Group for Extended Discussions on Life, Liberty and Bea Arthur’s Panties.