I don’t really like guns. I’ve fired a gun a few times, but I’d prefer not to be around them. I find them dangerous and unnecessary for my purposes in life today. If I see a gun on someone, I’m wary. Whether it’s a cop, a hunter or a thug, I see a gun as a danger.
But as much as I dislike guns, I’m absolutely opposed to efforts that would ban them or limit access to them. Why?
The murders of two Virginia journalists this week on live television has once again stoked the fires of those who want to ban guns or place strong restrictions on who can have them. Those people say we have a gun problem, but I strongly disagree. We have a “human problem.” We have a problem with human beings who have evil in their hearts and minds — and who are determined to hurt people they dislike.
Banning guns wouldn’t solve that problem — and banning guns would create a long-term problem far worse than the one it would allegedly solve.
Progressives who want to ban or limit guns are just as irrational and emotional as the many conservatives who want to ban or limit recreational drugs. In both cases, the position is taken for strongly emotional reasons and the person holding the belief has to ignore the evidence that his “solution” is worse than the problem it attempts to solve.

Governments can recognize rights, but no government creates rights
Love & Hope — Update:
Buggy WordPress plugin knocked site off the air for about 36 hours
In praise of the weirdos who most people don’t really seem to like
Goodbye, Courtney Haden
After his death, I can finally see good in narcissistic father again
Throwaway culture can leave us looking for something that lasts
If you participate in sham of voting, you’re responsible for what it creates
As I faced my father’s narcissism, I had to confront who I’d become