Wednesday, August 14, 2019


     Whenever there is a mass shooting I have to think about guns again.

     The solution seems very simple. However, many things get in the way of sanity.

     I know very little about gun politics and why it becomes so complicated.

    I know that I can't understand why after a mass shooting people make a lot of noise but little or no action is taken. It would seem that anybody in their right mind would not want to see many people shot at one time. Why don't people come up with a solution to prevent mass shootings? This is not a protection issue. We don't need something that fires many rounds rapidly in order to protect ourselves. Why aren't guns used to stop mass shooting?

    One thing that makes it easy to kill many people quickly is to have guns that fire many rounds quickly. Why are people allowed to walk around with guns that fire rapidly?

    The person walking around with a single shot gun isn't going to kill many people. He probably stands a good chance of being shot.

    The point I'm trying to make is that rapid fire guns are extremely dangerous compared to single shots. It would seem that this should be enough to control the type of gun on the street. Come to think of it, maybe it would be the best idea to not have guns on the street. 

    With all the people who are killed in mass shootings, wouldn't it seem reasonable to want to prevent these deaths? 

    Why not get rid of the guns?