Concerning “Common Sense Gun Control”

Gun photo from RGBStock

Yes, I tire of constantly writing this kind of column. Presumably, you tire of reading this kind of column as well. But when the usual suspects (supporters of victim disarmament) break into their happy dance atop the latest pile of corpses to tout a fraudulently labeled cause (“common sense gun control”), it all needs to be said anew.

In the past, I’ve explained why “gun control” is a stupid and evil idea, but apparently “common sense” is somehow orthogonal to  fact and morality. So, fine — let’s talk “common sense.”

More than 100 million Americans own more than 300 million guns.

Common sense says that ends the discussion.

Pro-victim-disarmament politicians apparently think that antagonizing 100 million likely voters and their families is a surefire path to electoral victory. Common sense  says it isn’t.

But even if it is, what follows? Suppose the victim disarmament lobby gets its way in Congress?

Common sense says that whether or not someone owns guns, and if so how many and what kind, are none of your business, no matter how many unconstitutional laws you manage to get passed asserting otherwise.

Common sense says that if your fellow Americans want to buy, sell or trade guns among themselves, they require neither your approval nor your permission and that most will simply, as they should, ignore your demands that they fill out piles of paperwork and submit themselves to intrusions into their privacy as a condition of exercising their rights.

Common sense says that should you attempt to proceed to outright confiscation and that if even 1% of those 100 million American gun owners respond to your orders to turn in their guns with “come try to take them and see what happens,” a spike in the stock prices of companies that manufacture body bags will quickly follow.

Yes, America is full of firearms.

No, you can neither take them away nor wish them away.

Yes, it really is just that simple.

Common sense says that since all of the above is obvious to anyone with an IQ exceeding his or her shoe size, you’re wasting your time with your ghoulish celebrations of each opportunity to renew your call for something that is Never. Going. To. Happen.

And common sense says that you should probably move on to some new cause. Perhaps one where you can be part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

Thomas L. Knapp is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism ( He lives and works in north central Florida.


  • I never tire of reading a tightly written article on the topic of guns and how they cannot and better yet should not be limited to only the rich and government employees.

  • Bob_Robert

    The trick, as it has been practiced up to the present, is never to piss off all 100 million at once.

    When they came for the suppressors and machine guns, I didn’t speak up because I didn’t own one.

    When they came for the short barrel shotguns, I didn’t speak up because I didn’t own one.

    When NYC banned guns in 1911, I didn’t speak up because I didn’t live in NYC.

    And on, and on, and on, until today the peaceful firearms owner is faced with a near impenetrable labyrinth of legalities, regulations, and stigma.

    The prohibitionists and hoplophobes ensure that any criminal use of a firearm by a private individual is spread across the airwaves and newspapers world wide, while armed self defense can’t even make the local news. They then claim that armed self defense “doesn’t happen”, and it’s near impossible to contradict them because it’s not in the news.

  • Greg Taylor

    It might be worthwhile to examine, through the lenses of Prohibition and New Jack City, exactly what will be the likely results if the gun grabbers get their way.It might also be interesting to look at the Real Crime – Murder, Aggravated Assault, Simple Assault, Rape, Armed Robbery – rates during the term of Feinstein’s “brady” law and since its expiration. Here’s an interesting hypothesis: The current spate of liberal anti-firearm “reichstag fires” may be a direct reaction to the Feinstein law’s failure.

    • The hypothesis is interesting, but I don’t find it facially likely, at least if by “Reichstag fires” you’re implying that the events are pre-plotted by the gun-grabbers. They’re certainly exploited for propaganda purposes in the same way, though.

      • Greg Taylor

        The propaganda exploitation is undeniable, however, the circumstances of some of the incidents appear, at least to me, highly suspect.

        • Yes, you’re far from the only person to propose the possibility. I don’t think it’s necessarily crazy or anything. It’s not that I doubt these people are evil enough to do it. It’s that I doubt they’re competent enough to do it very well.

          • Greg Taylor

            The majority of the active offenders, I agree. However, that the political machine that exploits their actions is also promoting or partly arranging for them doesn’t take a great deal of competence. Just a little influence.

          • Greg Taylor

            Can you get hold of a moderator on Libertarian and find out why I’m no longer able to comment? and I seem to have been dropped? DId I say something wrong?