Thursday, January 3, 2013
2nd Amendment, 2nd Chances, And Being Too Big To Be Efficient
I did something today that I thought I would never do again. I sent a check to the NRA.
Years ago I was a member of the NRA. Along with being a member of Ducks Unlimited and the National Wild Turkey Federation. The biggest gripe I had (and still have) with large non-profit organisations like these is the incredible amount of waste and inefficiency that's seems to go with large organizations.It's like they're all too big to be efficient.
I had a fall out with Duck Unlimited and eventually became disgruntled with most large non-profit and charitable causes I supported. It seemed the spent half the money I donated sending me junk mail, asking for more money! So for years, I've been donating to local charities. Giving to youth sports, the volunteer fire department, food shelf, etc.
But now with the recent surge of proposed anti-gun regulation, I had to write the check.
What pushed me over the edge was a comment I saw on Facebook. A woman wrote "I understand the 2nd Amendment. But it was written before the weapons of today. I'm sure the Founding Fathers would have worded it differently if they knew there would one day be assault rifles."
Normally I stand clear of an internet fight, but I had to chime in.
I replied: "What part of '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' isn't clear? The second amendment isn't about being able to shoot paper targets or for hunting. It is about defending yourself, loved ones, country and freedom."
I wonder if she also thinks that freedom of religion is fine, as long as it's religions of the time of our Founding Fathers? A statement like "A person can be a Baptist if the choose, but does anyone really need to be a Southern Baptist?" makes just as much sense. Should freedom of the press just apply to the printed word? "You can write what you want in a magazine or newspaper, but you better have government approval if you want to broadcast that on radio, TV or the internet."
The current anti-gun movement is understandable. Recent dramatic shootings, carried out by mentally ill people, take over the headlines and the television with good reason. They're dramatic. They're sensational and attention getting in their very nature. They scare the crap out of all of us how quickly they can happen. They pan out like a scene from an action movie.
The shootings have much more of an effect on us emotionally than the tens of thousands that die from tobacco use. Or who are killed every year by drunk drivers. Or even the fact that, while bill are being introduced to ban "assault rifles", according to the FBI more people are murdered by hammers and baseball bats than are killed by all types of rifles.
By the way, there isn't a rifle made that someone couldn't use to assault someone with. Some might not look as scary to you, but they can kill you faster and from a longer range than that evil little AR-15 platform firearm.
So, how do we protect ourselves from more crazies shooting up the schools? I think we should do what I suggested before in post "Preventing the Next Sand Hook: Two Ideas, Both Bad"
I did something today that I thought I would never do again. I sent a check to the NRA. Because we need to make sure: 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.