Gun Control, a Math Equation and a Rant on Irresponsible Parenting

I have had a few days to sort through my emotions and have come up with a few thoughts in the aftermath of Sandy Hook:

In regard to gun availability, the “toothpaste is out of the tube” already.  Just like abortion, we aren’t going back, no matter how many people think otherwise.

Having said that, do I think an ordinary citizen should be able to buy a weapon in which the ONLY use for that weapon is for killing a multitude of their fellow humans at once (even in the name of self defense)?

No, I do not.

Granted, I am ignorant in regard to the specific characteristics of these weapons, but I do know that you probably don’t need to fire 45 rounds of armor piercing ammunition per minute into an animal that you are trying to hunt for food or game.  These weapons were designed to kill other humans.

Period.

I get it, in war, that’s what needs to happen; however, I believe that they have no place in a (relatively) peaceful society.

Next, I consider myself a man of math and science.  Numbers make sense to me.

What I’m having a tough time understanding is this: if we are trying to reduce the amount of something, I don’t get how we get to that solution by ADDING more of one variable to one side of that equation.  Yes, I am aware that this is without taking human behavior into consideration (which is obviously a very large and essentially unmeasurable variable).

Pardon me, but I’m not sure I want Mrs. Randall, the Home Ec. teacher, who has never fired a gun at a living thing before, to be packing heat because her husband thinks that will help “protect her”.  Again, I’m just speculating here, but I’m really unsure how composed the common citizen would be in the event an armored lunatic is coming at them spraying bullets from a semi-automatic weapon.  Likely outcome: she gets mowed down and the madman has an additional weapon.

Lastly, the real issue here is how we, as a country, handle mental health problems (THE BIGGEST problem here) which are often exacerbated by events outside of the control of those involved.  Anecdotal accounts are suggesting that this kids life went from ‘troubled’ to ‘really fucking bad’ once his parents got a divorce.

Begin rant:

So many parents are selfish fucking assholes and get married/have kids without weighing the consequences of bringing new souls into this world.  Thankfully, I am not a child of a broken home, but my wife is, and it horribly damaged her childhood.

Here’s where I get nuts: parents need to stop being so fucking selfish and think about how their fucking horseshit “irreconcilable differences” are going to affect the people who care about them the most: namely, their fucking kids.  If someone is abusive or a horrible influence on their children, obviously that is a different story…but just wanting to stick your dick in other women (or vice versa) or “not getting along” is a really fucking shitty deal for those who you are leaving behind.

SUCK IT UP, AND BE A FUCKING MAN.  Take care of and BE THERE FOR your kids.  No matter how damaged they are, you leaving is only going to make things worse.

/rant

One final thing, I had a twinge of agony the other night when my main man MAXIMUS posted a picture on Twitter of his local PICU.  You and your family are in my thoughts (I don’t pray, so it would be disingenuous for me to say that).  With me having 2 little ones, I get kind of loony when they merely have a fever (I know, pace myself), I cannot conceive what it would be like for my children to really be sick.  Stay strong, I really hope everything gets better for you guys soon.

My best to you all.

-EM

11 Responses to “Gun Control, a Math Equation and a Rant on Irresponsible Parenting”

  1. +1 on the rant. Good to see you put the slide rule down long enough to post again.

    • Thanks.

      By the way, I love that Greg Maddux/Harvey Dorfman article you posted in Fly’s blog. Performance psychology is a big interest of mine (even if it is “a load of shit”).

      • Good. Glad someone found that worthwhile. He caught my interest while watching the Scott Boras “Game Changers” episode on Bloomberg TV. Was mesmerized by Maddux growing up.

        I loved that quote “self-consciousness will fuck you up” — Timeless

  2. You forget that the reason for “the right to bear arms” under the constitution is not for hunting…it is for protection from foreign and domestic threats. We had just thrown off the Brits and were worried about an equally oppressive fed government. Learn your history.

    • No shit, but thanks for the history lesson anyway.

      I guess all of those ICBM’s we have stashed in North Dakota are just backup in case the “right to bear arms” fails?

  3. What about an affluent overly protective mother who is into guns and uses them to bond with her autistic child? Not to blame autism or a hobby in guns, but this combination seems to have been lethal. Her guns should have had trigger locks or been locked in a gun safe, but this is all hindsight. Blaming the Dad, or the Mom, or guns or autism or video games or any one thing misses the whole picture.

    • I don’t think that I’m “blaming” anyone or anything.

      This guy was eventually going to hurt someone regardless of the means…he just happened to have easy access to a small cache of high-powered weapons, which made his task all that much easier. My rant was geared toward selfish parents who often choose self-gratification or “the easy way out” over accepting their job and fulfilling their duty as parents.

  4. I like guns, but there are no reasons Private ownership should include “Cop-killer” ammo or clips holding anymore than 5 to 6 rounds.
    3 shells in a shotgun works fine

    The British are not coming

    • This is what I’m getting at.

      When the second amendment was written armies would line up and march at one another in offensive formations. It made sense for people to be able to arm and defend themselves (and their neighbors).

      They tried to use that strategy in WWI which resulted in the Battle of Tannenberg or Masurian Lakes where over 100,000 soldiers died in each (think about that for a minute).

      The high-powered/capacity guns were specifically designed to kill a lot of people at once from a defensive position in a military operation…not for use in shooting coffee cans off of the fence at one’s country retreat while in preparation of the redcoats or injuns attacking.

  5. OutOfMyColdDeadHand

    Kudos on the post, well written and sincere.

    Couple of points to offer some of my perspective.

    As for the ‘armor-piercing rounds and high-capacity’ weapons – I agree, there’s no need in those, however I believe those are already illegal, so that isn’t really an issue here. Also it’s rather hard to draw a line when it comes to weapons. What’s ‘more harmful’ and should be banned vs not? It’s an easy decision when it comes to fully automatic weapons (civilians don’t need them, although just a few decades ago just about anyone could get them (and pretty cheap) and mass murders using those were not as widespread, so perhaps the problem isn’t necessarily guns). Anyone who’s half way decent with guns can inflict just as much damage with a shotgun (especially in close quarters) or a revolver or 2 with some speed loaders. Especially in cases like the school in Newton, where obviously no one is shooting back. So there are a lot of grey areas here.

    Secondly to your point of ‘sticking together and setting aside ‘fucking horseshit “irreconcilable differences”…. In an ideal world that would obviously be the case, but shit happens, people grow apart, cheat, fight, whatever the case. I grew up with some guys whose parents stayed together ‘for the kids’ and ended up making themselves AND the kids fucking miserable and emotional wrecks. Yes, parents should do what’s best for the kids, but sometimes that actually means splitting up.

    • I agree. I guess my anger was directed toward a father leaving his sick child. Sure people grow apart, but I believe in some situations, people need to suck it up and sacrifice for the good of humanity. You have to find a way to make it work over basically abandoning a kid who absolutely needs a father.

      As far as guns are concerned, I think there needs to be a distinction between a weapon used for military defense and for self defense.

Comments are closed.
Previous Posts by elizamae
Thanks
10 comments

Gun Control, a Math Equation and a Rant on Irresponsible Parenting

I have had a few days to sort through my emotions and have come up with a few thoughts in the aftermath of Sandy Hook:

In regard to gun availability, the “toothpaste is out of the tube” already.  Just like abortion, we aren’t going back, no matter how many people think otherwise.

Having said that, do I think an ordinary citizen should be able to buy a weapon in which the ONLY use for that weapon is for killing a multitude of their fellow humans at once (even in the name of self defense)?

No, I do not.

Granted, I am ignorant in regard to the specific characteristics of these weapons, but I do know that you probably don’t need to fire 45 rounds of armor piercing ammunition per minute into an animal that you are trying to hunt for food or game.  These weapons were designed to kill other humans.

Period.

I get it, in war, that’s what needs to happen; however, I believe that they have no place in a (relatively) peaceful society.

Next, I consider myself a man of math and science.  Numbers make sense to me.

What I’m having a tough time understanding is this: if we are trying to reduce the amount of something, I don’t get how we get to that solution by ADDING more of one variable to one side of that equation.  Yes, I am aware that this is without taking human behavior into consideration (which is obviously a very large and essentially unmeasurable variable).

Pardon me, but I’m not sure I want Mrs. Randall, the Home Ec. teacher, who has never fired a gun at a living thing before, to be packing heat because her husband thinks that will help “protect her”.  Again, I’m just speculating here, but I’m really unsure how composed the common citizen would be in the event an armored lunatic is coming at them spraying bullets from a semi-automatic weapon.  Likely outcome: she gets mowed down and the madman has an additional weapon.

Lastly, the real issue here is how we, as a country, handle mental health problems (THE BIGGEST problem here) which are often exacerbated by events outside of the control of those involved.  Anecdotal accounts are suggesting that this kids life went from ‘troubled’ to ‘really fucking bad’ once his parents got a divorce.

Begin rant:

So many parents are selfish fucking assholes and get married/have kids without weighing the consequences of bringing new souls into this world.  Thankfully, I am not a child of a broken home, but my wife is, and it horribly damaged her childhood.

Here’s where I get nuts: parents need to stop being so fucking selfish and think about how their fucking horseshit “irreconcilable differences” are going to affect the people who care about them the most: namely, their fucking kids.  If someone is abusive or a horrible influence on their children, obviously that is a different story…but just wanting to stick your dick in other women (or vice versa) or “not getting along” is a really fucking shitty deal for those who you are leaving behind.

SUCK IT UP, AND BE A FUCKING MAN.  Take care of and BE THERE FOR your kids.  No matter how damaged they are, you leaving is only going to make things worse.

/rant

One final thing, I had a twinge of agony the other night when my main man MAXIMUS posted a picture on Twitter of his local PICU.  You and your family are in my thoughts (I don’t pray, so it would be disingenuous for me to say that).  With me having 2 little ones, I get kind of loony when they merely have a fever (I know, pace myself), I cannot conceive what it would be like for my children to really be sick.  Stay strong, I really hope everything gets better for you guys soon.

My best to you all.

-EM

11 Responses to “Gun Control, a Math Equation and a Rant on Irresponsible Parenting”

  1. +1 on the rant. Good to see you put the slide rule down long enough to post again.

    • Thanks.

      By the way, I love that Greg Maddux/Harvey Dorfman article you posted in Fly’s blog. Performance psychology is a big interest of mine (even if it is “a load of shit”).

      • Good. Glad someone found that worthwhile. He caught my interest while watching the Scott Boras “Game Changers” episode on Bloomberg TV. Was mesmerized by Maddux growing up.

        I loved that quote “self-consciousness will fuck you up” — Timeless

  2. You forget that the reason for “the right to bear arms” under the constitution is not for hunting…it is for protection from foreign and domestic threats. We had just thrown off the Brits and were worried about an equally oppressive fed government. Learn your history.

    • No shit, but thanks for the history lesson anyway.

      I guess all of those ICBM’s we have stashed in North Dakota are just backup in case the “right to bear arms” fails?

  3. What about an affluent overly protective mother who is into guns and uses them to bond with her autistic child? Not to blame autism or a hobby in guns, but this combination seems to have been lethal. Her guns should have had trigger locks or been locked in a gun safe, but this is all hindsight. Blaming the Dad, or the Mom, or guns or autism or video games or any one thing misses the whole picture.

    • I don’t think that I’m “blaming” anyone or anything.

      This guy was eventually going to hurt someone regardless of the means…he just happened to have easy access to a small cache of high-powered weapons, which made his task all that much easier. My rant was geared toward selfish parents who often choose self-gratification or “the easy way out” over accepting their job and fulfilling their duty as parents.

  4. I like guns, but there are no reasons Private ownership should include “Cop-killer” ammo or clips holding anymore than 5 to 6 rounds.
    3 shells in a shotgun works fine

    The British are not coming

    • This is what I’m getting at.

      When the second amendment was written armies would line up and march at one another in offensive formations. It made sense for people to be able to arm and defend themselves (and their neighbors).

      They tried to use that strategy in WWI which resulted in the Battle of Tannenberg or Masurian Lakes where over 100,000 soldiers died in each (think about that for a minute).

      The high-powered/capacity guns were specifically designed to kill a lot of people at once from a defensive position in a military operation…not for use in shooting coffee cans off of the fence at one’s country retreat while in preparation of the redcoats or injuns attacking.

  5. OutOfMyColdDeadHand

    Kudos on the post, well written and sincere.

    Couple of points to offer some of my perspective.

    As for the ‘armor-piercing rounds and high-capacity’ weapons – I agree, there’s no need in those, however I believe those are already illegal, so that isn’t really an issue here. Also it’s rather hard to draw a line when it comes to weapons. What’s ‘more harmful’ and should be banned vs not? It’s an easy decision when it comes to fully automatic weapons (civilians don’t need them, although just a few decades ago just about anyone could get them (and pretty cheap) and mass murders using those were not as widespread, so perhaps the problem isn’t necessarily guns). Anyone who’s half way decent with guns can inflict just as much damage with a shotgun (especially in close quarters) or a revolver or 2 with some speed loaders. Especially in cases like the school in Newton, where obviously no one is shooting back. So there are a lot of grey areas here.

    Secondly to your point of ‘sticking together and setting aside ‘fucking horseshit “irreconcilable differences”…. In an ideal world that would obviously be the case, but shit happens, people grow apart, cheat, fight, whatever the case. I grew up with some guys whose parents stayed together ‘for the kids’ and ended up making themselves AND the kids fucking miserable and emotional wrecks. Yes, parents should do what’s best for the kids, but sometimes that actually means splitting up.

    • I agree. I guess my anger was directed toward a father leaving his sick child. Sure people grow apart, but I believe in some situations, people need to suck it up and sacrifice for the good of humanity. You have to find a way to make it work over basically abandoning a kid who absolutely needs a father.

      As far as guns are concerned, I think there needs to be a distinction between a weapon used for military defense and for self defense.

Comments are closed.