I’m a little late with this and truly sorry about that, but I have some thoughts about how AR -15s are in fact way past what is appropriate for civilian availability and should certainly not be given to people who have already proven themselves as not even being “civil.” But also in terms of what is civil and what is war, there is something else I have to add to the gun debate which is that I think for all the shootings there are at least that many people who should have been shot instead. The death penalty could and should also be part of this discussion of mass shootings, as well as the fact that 30 thousand dollars a year gets spent on facilitating jail for murderers who took innocent lives and don’t deserve to live. That is also part of a picture where disabled people are given a third of minimum wage to live on when instead they should have been included in the work force, which is also widely underpaid. All of these problems are related to valuing and not valuing life, which should generally be protected “to the death.” Some people like to say, “Who are we to choose who can live” when they pretend to be moral and above the death penalty instead of beneath it. But actually, for centuries, people have quite often been moral enough to make that call, and they will do so again if and when there is war because of these unresolved problems. The immorality and amorality and cowardice of those who do not stand up to crime is absolutely part of this same problem, and don’t think that is not a major factor in why up to half the country refuses to give up access to what are clearly very dangerous and very modern weapons meant for legitimate military protection.
