I feel the urge to respond to the way Democrats have been approaching the gun issue. The Democratic You-Tube debate featured a weird guy in army fatigues with an M16 which he referred to as "his baby." The candidates then proceeded to take turns deriding this (straw)man for being the deranged nut he apparently is. They appeared to make the analogy that anyone who is for private gun ownership must be a crazed survivalist living in a big square state, eating MRE's, and watching "Faux" News on his battery powered television. I find this attitude offensive, and I feel that Democrats can do better than this.
I believe in private gun ownership.
Before you dismiss me as just another wingnut please hear me out and let met tell you about myself.
I don't believe that private gun ownership is a bulwark against fascism, though this is a popular wingnut talking point. Contrary to what they would have you believe, the Nazi's only outlawed Jews from private gun ownership, not the general public.
I don't dress in army fatigues. I had enough of that when I was drafted into the German Military in the late 90's. I'm 28. My Mom is American and my Dad is German which makes me a dual citizen. I graduated from law school in New Jersey this year. I'm strongly for stem cell research, I fervently believe in a womans right to choose, I'm for Universal Health care, I was horrified by the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Bill, I sneered at "Terry's law", and I'm basically at odds with every decision the Bush administration made except the decision not to release a portion of the strategic oil reserves to lower gas prices a few years ago. I was posting on this site arguing against an Iraq invasion long before Powell made his laughable power-point UN presentation.
So why do I believe in private gun ownership? Apparently I shouldn't. I live in an apartment in a safe neighborhood, I don't hunt and I don't have any friends who do. In my lifetime so far I've killed a squirrel, a duck, a groundhog, and about a dozen mice. As stupid as it sounds, their deaths still bother me on occasion. Nevertheless, I believe that subject to proper regulation a citizen has the right to own firearms to defend himself and his loved ones from those who would do them harm or to hunt.
Why? because I am capable of acknowledging that not everyone is in the same situation as myself. I went to law school in Camden, one of the most dangerous cities in the United States despite its location in a State which has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country. People there classify their neighborhoods as "shooting" or "dealing", meaning some are where shootings often take place, others where drug dealing prevails. I found that I could not in good conscience deny honest citizens the right to protect themselves from the evils around them just to protect an ideal.
If it was possible to waive a magic wand and make all guns vanish I would be the first one to cheer Harry Potter on...but it isn't. Instead Democrats want the next best thing, which is to ban private gun ownership. This aim is of course the greatest fear of those who believe in gun ownership, and for many it is the sole reason they do not vote Democrat, thus costing us millions of potential votes.
Why do Democrats have to be so stubbornly ideological?
To paraphrase Robert Heinlein, when you vote for the impossible you only succeed in achieving the disastrous possible. When the British voted to outlaw handguns and heavily regulate rifles in 1997 it didn't make the problem of armed crime go away. Criminals are still shooting people in Britain with no appreciable decrease in frequency. Even in Japan, a country where it is illegal to even touch a gun of any sort, police still confiscate hundreds of illegal firearms per year. As the Re-thughs have proven to us again and again and again pure ideology is a silly reason to propagate any political agenda, and pushing an ideology that costs millions of votes is even more silly.
Criminals will always arm themselves as best they can and not everyone is blessed with the good fortune to be able to afford to live in a safe neighborhood. Thus I find it highly disingenuous of our Presidential candidates to dismiss what I consider legitimate fears for personal safety in the manner they did.