Common Sense Gun Control Laws

For some very cool firearm-related bumper stickers, t-shirts, coffee mugs and more, see this link:
http://www.cafepress.com/buy/firearms?pid=5951342

COMMON SENSE

The definition of Common sense:

(From Wikipedia)
One meaning of the term common sense (or as an adjective, commonsense) on a strict construction of the term, is what people in common would agree; that which they "sense" in common as their common natural understanding. Some use the phrase to refer to beliefs or propositions that in their opinion they consider would in most people's experience be prudent and of sound judgment, without dependence upon esoteric knowledge or study or research, but based upon what is believed to be knowledge held by people "in common". The knowledge and experience most people have, or are believed to have by the person using the term.

Common sense in my own definition means a set of beliefs on a particular topic where a normally adjusted person would not need any degree of instruction on the topic to agree with the proposed thesis.

In other words, a concept that could be labeled as common sense is a statement of fact that we can all pretty much agree upon without having to go through a university degree program first.

Now, with that said, let me give you a clear, concise and easy to understand quotation, that is a prime example of what I would call a common sense statement:

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."-- Plato(429-347 BC)

Now, I think we can all agree that in this above quotation, Plato has made a common sense statement. It does not require a Master's Degree in Criminal Justice to understand and agree to this above common sense statement.

If everyone can agree that good people don't need laws to ensure their honesty, responsibility and moral integrity, why then are most gun control laws focused upon restricting the possession, transfer, transportation and carry of firearms by law abiding people?

I know that for the truly ignorant and slow-witted among us, this concept may be a bit steep on the learning curve, so, I'll try to explain it a bit better.

The person who conducts his life with honesty, uprightness, integrity, truthfulness and honor and traditionally operates his or her life within the letter of the law, does not commit any crimes with firearms. Now that's a truly common sense statement, if I've ever heard one. Law abiding gun owners, commit no crimes. Even for the biggest dunce among us, this is not a difficult concept to grasp.

Now that we can agree that law abiding firearm owners don't commit crime, can someone answer the question as to why lawful and honest gun owners are made subject to anti-crime legislation?

In other words, if the aim of any gun control law is to reduce violent acts, why does such a law include restrictions upon those who obey the law?

That pretty much sums up the NRA's argument, as well as the pro-gun argument from www.SaveTheGuns.com as well.

As a law-abiding, honest, decent and upstanding individual, my rights to own and carry the firearm of my choice are restricted by legislation aimed at violent criminals. That's very frustrating to us in the pro-gun community.

We should be treated fairly. Most gun control legislation seems to assume that because we own and carry firearms, that we're somehow predisposed to commit the violent criminal acts of rape, robbery and murder. That's simply not the case and it goes to the center of the entire issue.

Legislation that is supposedly aimed at reducing crime, should focus solely upon criminal possession of a firearm during a criminal act. It should be focused upon reducing the common ways in which felons obtain illegal firearms. It should be focused upon increasing penalties for crimes where the perpetrator possesses, brandishes, fires or uses the firearm to injure someone intentionally.

LAW ABIDING GUN OWNERS ARE FRANKLY TIRED OF HAVING TO ABIDE BY RESTRICTIVE LEGISLATION THAT'S SUPPOSEDLY AIMED AT REDUCING VIOLENT CRIME.

WE'RE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ACTS OF VIOLENCE COMMITTED BY VIOLENT THUGS MERELY BECAUSE WE MIGHT LAWFULLY OWN AND SAFELY USE THE SAME HANDGUN THAT A THUG USES DURING THE COMMISSION OF A VIOLENT ACT.

IT'S REALLY NOT TOO DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND OUR FRUSTRATION IS IT?

We simply want to see laws that leave the law abiding firearm owner out of the loop of firearm related legislation aimed at reducing violent crime.

That's it. It's that simple.

Thanks for listening,
Marc Richardson
www.SaveTheGuns.com