On the left, we say, “Stay out of my bedroom!” and “Stay out of my body!”
But when someone on the right says, “Stay out of my gun cabinet!,” shouldn’t we consider that with equal weight?
I think we should.
I think anyone on the left who thinks we should take away people’s firearms is akin to people on the right who wear shirts with the motto, “I’d rather be Russian than a Democrat.”
It’s not right. It’s not fair. And it does not make any sense. We have to start doing things that make sense.
Let that sink in, folks.
We are a country based on freedom. And so extending that freedom to the Second Amendment should not and, as it turned out, was not that big of a deal.
So why is it now?
But likewise, why do folks on the right get so torn up with this fear of losing their rifle or handgun? Virtually no one is saying that.
You’re reading way too much into the 24-hour news cycle. The headlines are grabbing you by the throat, and you are allowing it.
I know the good folks out at Hulme Sporting Goods appreciate your business, but just because someone on “Tucker Carlson” or “Morning Joe” made a remark about gun legislation doesn’t mean you need to run out right now and pick yourself up a couple of extra weapons!
I mean, again, the folks at Hulme have some great deals on all your hunting and fishing needs, so still go out there and shop, just don’t do it in such a heightened state of shock.
Let me throw something else out at you.
Recently, my 15-year-old nephew and I found ourselves down in Medina. We’d delivered something to a school out in a cornfield, and we had some nice country roads we could take back to Milan.
I thought it was an opportune time for him to get some use out of that learner’s permit. And he did, too. And he did great.
Now the road home eventually turned into broader highways, four-lane highways and busier highways. This got a bit trickier and, as you would imagine on an hour-long drive, we had a couple of tricky moments.
We survived. But most importantly, a learning driver got some good experience. Well no, most important is we survived; but still, you get what I’m saying!
To drive a car, you must get a learner’s permit. You must take a written test for that. Then to get your final driver’s license, you must pass an actual driving test with a live person in the vehicle.
Now if you’re a 16-year-old in Tennessee, not only do you have to do all that stuff, but also you cannot give a ride to more than one person who is not a relative.
So, you have this further restriction until you’re 17. Oh, and did I mention auto insurance?
Except that’s not all.
Let’s say you want to drive a school bus. That takes a different license.
Let’s say you want to drive an 18-wheeler. That takes a different license.
Let’s say you want to drive a bulldozer. OK, it probably doesn’t take a different license, but it sure takes a lot of training.
I get it, right? You get it also, right? Operating a vehicle can be a dangerous thing to someone who has not properly studied and practiced it.
And so you know where I’m going with this, but wait. Don’t skip ahead.
And so, why don’t we look at firearms in the same way?
Now, I had hunter safety when I was in seventh grade. I don’t know that it was necessary. My father already had taught me that stuff.
I know most of us here care about our children and want them to have a healthy and safe hunting experience.
So I’m not really worried so much about the basic entry-level firearm.
But doesn’t it make sense as we ratchet up the difficulty and complexity level, as we do with vehicles, that we give some consideration not to if someone should own a firearm, but instead, do they understand the operational level of this weapon?
Shouldn’t we have a test or two, like we do with driving? Shouldn’t we have insurance to cover increased risks?
I’m just saying, we use this approach with everything else. Why are guns so different?
DAN JACKSON is a self-employed Paris businessman. His email address is firstname.lastname@example.org.