Most gun control laws really seem designed to keep regular people from either wanting or buying firearms. The theory seems to be that if we don't buy guns, criminals can't get them, which is stupid. At least, that's what's presented to us, even if I'm not so sure I buy it.
But an effort underway in Montana does something completely different.
They're trying to expand shooting sports completely, which will probably drive more people to become gun owners in the long term.
A bill heading to the House Floor could expand shooting sports in the Treasure State.
State Sen. Kerri Seekins-Crowe presented House Bill 899 to the House Business and Labor committee Thursday.
The bill aims to develop a state shooting complex and oversight task force.
The task force would be responsible for analyzing, discussing, and recommending future opportunities and priorities for Montana public range development.
Some have concerns about where these complexes will be located, probably because the sound wouldn't be ideal for those living nearby.
Of course, if Congress would just deregulate suppressors, the ranges could simply require those, and the noise would be minimal. It wouldn't be gone because suppressors don't work quite that way in most cases, but it would be a lot quieter.
That's beyond Montana's authority, though, so let's not get too far into the weeds on that issue.
Instead, it's worth noting that the effort here seems pretty basic; just bang out a new shooting complex and set the framework for an organization to recommend more down the road. It's a good thing, but not earth-shattering.
But the thing is, people who go shooting have a strong tendency to become pro-gun. They buy them, train with them, and defend them. Even anti-gunners who get taken to the range acknowledge they enjoyed it, and many become a lot less vehement in their beliefs. Others change their minds completely.
Increasing the ability to take people shooting has a direct impact on how many people oppose the right to keep and bear arms.
And this is one of those things that can be framed as an easy sell pretty much anywhere. In pro-gun states, what I said applies perfectly well.
In anti-gun states, the argument becomes that if you want responsible gun owners, they need a place to practice so that they can use their firearms safely and effectively as opposed to having to find impromptu ranges on people's land that may not be safe enough. After all, if you're shooting up a gentle slope without realizing it, you aren't going to know where that round will land.
It's a real issue in and of itself, so that is a selling point.
So, Montana is taking an approach that will probably yield serious long-term results for gun rights.
That will eventually lead to a reduction in the crime rate as bad guys suddenly have to deal with a whole lot more people with guns, and one thing I've noticed about bad guys is that most of them are cowards who want anything but a fair fight. That means they'll eventually stop their criminal ways, at least with violence, and move on to something else.
Or they'll be dead.
That, too, is a win.
And it's a better win than gun control will ever be able to deliver.