While making the blog rounds today, I read an interesting post over at
First Nations' place. I agree wholeheartedly with what she wrote. I have no problem with responsible gun ownership. But how is "responsible" determined? This statement is what brought my question to mind:
"...an average, socially-adjusted sane person isn't going to go around bragging about how they killed someone; taking a life is horrifying and sickening, even if it is a 'them or me and mine' situation."
I have had the misfortune of knowing a couple folks who, by all accounts, would seem to be "average, socially-adjusted" sane people. Folks who had grown up around guns, who knew how to handle them properly, even had military training. But these are demented folks who should NEVER be allowed the privilege of gun ownership. That's what is scary. The fact that someone could pass background checks because they have never been on the wrong side of the law, yet is mentally and emotionally unfit to responsibly own a gun.
Luckily, I no longer have any contact with these people, but a while back a mutual acquaintance told me about a conversation she had had with one of the individuals in question. One of the statements this person had made literally gave me a cold chill. They had stated with glee that they wanted to get a gun with the specific purpose in mind of using it on someone who would dare break into their house since in this state they would not be prosecuted for it.
Now while I have no problem with someone defending themselves, I DO have a problem with someone relishing the idea of shooting someone. That's fucking sick. While I have no sympathy for a criminal being shot while perpetrating a crime, and dare I say that they would be getting what they deserved, enjoying shooting someone, in my opinion, puts you on the same level as the criminal.