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.

Mundane expressions of love matter more than movie versions
In the face of hazardous times, some still driven to be helpers
Best years of our lives? For me, teen years were start of feeling like alien
Federal checks are destroying incentive to take entry-level jobs
Smart people will flee big cities before death, disease take over
Galt’s Gulch? I can live without that, but I need my own ‘Akston’s diner’
THE McELROY ZOO: Meet Sonny, a sweet boy who needs a home
I’m painfully blind when I ignore the inheritance I’ve been given
Is AI software a useful tool or does it dictate how I see myself?