To be perfectly honest, this entire headline is the entire story. Vice News published a piece today of pure amazement that the National Rifle Association believes that most Americans would be better protected if they owned a gun. Furthermore, Vice News is surprised that Americans are wary and distrustful of handing over even more government power to infringe upon Constitutional rights.
In attempt at snark that is supposed to supplement wit and intellectual humor, Vice News pretentiously lambasted Wayne LaPierre, president of the NRA for advocating Second Amendment rights for all Americans.
"These gun rights voices believe, as NRA President Wayne LaPierre once said, that "the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun." Bad guys, in this worldview, are omnipresent; it's pointless to try to stop them from getting the most advanced weaponry possible. The answer is to make it easier for good guys to get guns—a project that has been pursued with much gusto and success. That this might make it easier for bad guys (or good guys who turn bad) to get guns is an unfortunate side effect, but in the end, it won't matter, because the goal is to make sure everyone is prepared to engage in a shootout at all times."
The piece continues, incredulous that people believe an individual practicing self-governance and having the option for self-defense is a viable form of protection.
And by everyone, I mean everyone. Here is a surely incomplete list of people that gun rights activists believe should be packing heat. Once all of these categories of Americans are all carrying guns on them at all times, presumably we will finally be safe:
Anyone who goes to a nightclub
"Every black person in America" –Ann Coulter
Anyone with a job in an office
Some people who commit domestic violence
Neighborhood watch volunteers like George Zimmerman
The links go to various claims made by GOP members and NRA officials that "If (this person/group) had a gun during (this event) then they would be safer. It can be argued that in certain situations, having a gun would make little to no difference in defending from an attacker.
It is not exactly clear why it is surprising that the NRA believes that law-abiding Americans who have no history of mental illness, domestic abuse, threatening behavior, or other excluding factors should own a gun to defend themselves. The government, must prove a compelling interest to infringe upon constitutional rights. In certain cases, such as the monster who shot up Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, the government has a compelling reason to intervene.
There are serious conversations and lengthy arduous debates that need to be had before the government radically changes which Americans can exercise their rights. Unless the Second Amendment is repealed, it is up to the government to prove why an individual should not have a gun.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member