"Violent movies and videogames are to blame!"

Canada, Europe and Japan have violent movies and videogames. But nowhere near the shootings that we have. What they don’t have is semiautomatic weapons in the hands of their citizens.

"But... the Second Amendment!"

The second amendment says this:
  "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

If the founding fathers wanted no limits on guns, why did they include "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state" in the amendment?

They could have simply had the amendment state: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

But they didn't. Because regulation, and that these guns are being used for a militia (i.e. the military), are key to this amendment.
 The purpose of citizens bearing muskets was to form a well regulated militia to act as security for the state because we (wisely) had no standing armies at the time.
 That's no longer the case.

Furthermore, the founding fathers never envisioned automatic and semiautomatic weapons. They shouldn't be available for private ownership any more than Tomahawk missiles should.

"But I need my guns to overthrow the tyrannical federal government!"

If the purpose of gun ownership is to outshoot the US government, I'm afraid you're going to need fighter jets, stealth bombers, aircraft carriers, and nuclear submarines.
  This excuse doesn’t make any sense.

"I'll never be safe without my guns!"

Studies prove that gun owners, and their loved ones, are more likely to be shot by their guns than are criminals. Just ask gun owner, Nancy Lanza.

"Liberals are always trying to take away our guns!"

“Liberals” like gun control advocates Ronald Reagan and Rupert Murdoch?

Or maybe “liberals” like Jesus Christ, who said: "Put your sword back in its place! Everyone who uses a sword will be killed by a sword?"

"School shootings happen because God has been taken out of our schools, starting in the 1970’s!"

The supposed erosion of "American" values has nothing to do with this.
  Otherwise all the “godless, socialist, un-American” countries around the world would have more shootings than we have. But they don't.

What's really happened since the 1970's is the rise of the NRA as a political power in the Republican Party. The result is more guns, and more semiautomatic guns, are out there than ever before.

Also, the Republicans have been systematically cutting the social safety net that would have helped the mentally ill.

In short, too many guns, and less assistance for mental illness. The tragic result should come as no surprise.

"It won't make a difference if we take guns away! Evil will still find a way!"

Gun owners commit suicide at a higher rate than do normal people. Why is this if guns don't matter and people will find a way no matter what?

If we could only pass laws that are 100% enforceable, then murder wouldn't be a crime.

"If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns!"

Um, not only outlaws. Law enforcement will have guns too.

This excuse is like saying, "If we outlaw murder, only outlaws will be murderers!"
 …So?

"We need armed guards at every school in America!"

Columbine had two armed guards present when the massacre happened.
There were plenty of armed men at Fort Hood when that shooting happened.

"The NRA is unstoppable! It's hopeless to oppose them!"

If we want it bad enough, it will happen.
 A semiautomatic weapon ban is achievable.

If the NRA was so damned powerful, how did Obama get re-elected? How did all those Congressmen the NRA were backing in 2012 end up losing?

Look, the NRA is just a lobbying group for gun manufacturers who would make less profit if semiautomatic weapons were banned.

Karl Rove, the Koch Brothers and the Super PACs got beat.
  The NRA can be beat.

If 20 dead children isn’t enough to make it happen, what the hell is?

Armed and Dangerous: a blog about gun violence

Condemned To Repeat It blog