Sean Tevis at a shooting range. Click to see at full size.
My internet friend Sean Tevis, whom you may remember from his “300” campaign to run for Senate in Kansas and bring some much-needed sanity to their government…
…has a proposal for the current debate on guns. It’s in the topmost photo in this post (click it to see it at a larger size), or read it below:
There’s been a lot of talk about how guns can be used to defend yourself.
So I went to a firing range.
It takes a surprising amount of time to load it and ready yourself to shoot.
Then, from 25 feet away, I hit the target twice. A stationary, non-moving, not-hiding-behind-things and trying-to-attack me kind of target.
But it was kind of…fun.
To my Pro-Gun friends, I have some advice. Drop the arguments about needing guns to protect yourself from bad guys. And also the dubious Founding fathers/defend-against-a-tyrannical-government scenarios like Red Dawn. These arguments make you seem crazy. Paranoid. Scary.
Instead, tell us why it’s fun. That you’ll do your best to make sure no one gets hurt. Then work with us to find ways to make America safe, secure and strong.
As a guy who believes that there is such a thing as responsible gun ownership — and as someone dating the world’s cutest NRA member — I think it’s worth considering what Sean’s saying.
3 replies on “Sean Tevis’ Modest Proposal on the Gun Control Debate”
Sure, firing a gun is fun. Lots of other things are fun too, but you don’t see me driving blindfolded down Queen St. (Now _there’s_ a rush).
I’m given up a lot of fun stuff for the greater good. How about gun owners do the same thing?
He should bring “seanity” to government.
I generally don’t bother with the “as a deterrent against an overtly hostile government” argument, as most of us delightfully coddled first worlders are aghast at the idea that citizens in a modern country would ever have to resort to that kind of violence. It’s an argument that’s too far disconnected from our daily reality, and the idea of any kind of “insurance” that is comprised of an actual physical good seems like it should be left to Idaho survivalists. Fine. I agree that’s not a great argument.
But how about skipping past the “because it’s fun” argument and addressing the more fundamental question of why adults in a free society should have to justify their private actions at all?
And then yes, gun owners should stop freaking the hell out anytime someone talks about safety and oversight. I don’t want the insane and the criminal to buy guns, and if private sales are in any way allowing that to happen, then those should go through the same sanity check that retail sales do.