Click Here for Jason Alexander’s rant on gun issues.
Thank you Jason – excellent! Also read a quote recently that said something about the founding fathers and the 2nd amendment and the guns of the time being Flintlock and musket versus what we have today. I have no problem with people owning guns for hunting and such but some of the arguments you hear supporting these much more deadly firearms?
I know this can be a highly charged issue, but I do believe it is an issue that we need to find ways to discuss more rationally. And can’t we agree, as Jason suggests, that we should find ways to try and make it more difficult to purchase a gun, especially multiple guns and especially these more lethal guns?
From a Christian perspective, I’ve also thought about, “what would Jesus pack?” I know the issue is much more complicated than just a simple little comment like that, but it’s worth thinking about.
I would love to hear people’s rational and respectful comments here on this page – please share.
Howie's Blog 
Seriously. I know people get “up in arms” (pun intended) about ability to own/purchase/carry firearms. Personally, I’m not a hunter and am probably a bit of a wuss/pacifist (not sure which really sometimes). I think it should be difficult to obtain a weapon. Something about all of his purchases should have thrown up a red flag somewhere. Not that we can always predict and prevent….but I’d always err on the side of guns being less available.
LikeLike
I’ve heard so many “answers” to his questions that aren’t answers at all but repeats of the same old lines. What I haven’t seen is a real answer to the question of how and why one could defend the sale of assault weapons. I get hunting guns. I even get personal firearms in the home, though I think it’s a bad idea, personally. But how can a person defend freedom to purchase something only meant to kill lots of people? And I think Jesus would be grieved by our insistence on personal rights at the expense of human life. Yes, people will always kill people. Sin is original and it is powerful. But our compliance through defending the right to do so easily and with great force is deplorable. Well, that’s putting my position subtly . . .
LikeLike
great article. thoughtful replies. Thank you, howie, wick and jill!
LikeLike
Here are a few things that Jason missed. First off, humans are extremely fragile beings, much more fragile than almost every big game species in the world, and since most hunters and sportsmen are intent on making the most efficient and humane kill possible, hunting rifles are typically much more powerful than assault rifles. A standard 5.56 NATO (.223 rem) which is the same cartridge fired through a standard M16, is considered by many to be too small of a round for anything bigger than about a 40lb coyote. Secondly, assault rifles are not typically more accurate than hunting rifles. Many hunting rifles can put every shot within a 2″ circle at 300yds, most standard assault rifles would be lucky to hit a 5″ target at that distance. And finally, assault rifles actually fill a niche in the hunting world, especially for nighttime hog and predator hunting. These animals are most active at night, and can severly harm the livlihood of farmers. Assault rifles are equiped to be customized with a variety of flashlights, night sights, and even night vision systems, for nighttime hunting, and their semi-automatic abilities allow the hunter to take make quick follow-up shots if necessary. So yes, assualt weapons are actually very useful in hunting. I would be inclined to agree with the comment about the 100rd magazine. I have used magazines that hold as much as 50rds, and while they can be fun at the range, they really do not have any purpose in hunting, and I would not be heartbroken if they were no longer available. It does however break my heart to see this kind of recklessness and complete disregard for human lives. The difference between people like this and recreational shooters/hunters is that they view guns as weapons when they should be treated as tools built for a very specific purpose. My rifle is a tool for hunting and long range target shooting, my shotgun for small game animals, and even my handgun has a purpose-to defend my life or the life of another if there is absolutely no other option. And not a single one of those tools has ever, or will ever be used for anything other than what they were specifically made for. I have some other views that I would like to express, but I would rather not start any huge debates. I only thank the Lord that his magazine jammed.
LikeLike
Thanks for this very informative post and your sensitivity to the whole issue. Very helpful!
LikeLike
I would also like to touch on the multiple gun issue. I own multiple guns, because they are all built for a very specific purpose. My 9mm would not be a very good duck hunting gun, and neither would my rifle, but my shotgun is perfect for it. Likewise, my shotgun would be horrible for hunting varmint at more than 50yds, but my rifle is efficent for this purpose at much longer ranges, but would not be efficient for big game like deer and elk, where a larger caliber rifle would work well. Also, if I am spending hundreds or thousands of dollars to go hunting out west, I would probably be inclined to take a spare gun in case of a malfunction. I would be very upset to get there and not be able to hunt at all due to an equipment failure. So there is aso a very good explanation for multiple guns. Also, the flintlock firearms that were around at the time the constitution was written were NOT efficient at killing animals. They were highly inaccurate and many animals were wounded and suffered from these types of firearms. Modern firearms allow hunters to make much more ethical kills and result in much less suffering for the animal, and many times no suffering at all.
LikeLike