Open Letter to Religion-based Gun Control Advocates

The following is the first contribution piece TLR has received.

Submitted by: Jake White

Check out his group “Gun Talk” on Facebook!


To all those who want to “end gun violence”: Hi, there. I’m hoping for some clarification on things.

Why do you want to end gun violence? Why not violent crime? There is, after all, a difference.

Gun violence is a violent act with a gun. Self-defense is often violent, as we must repel violent criminals with something more substantial than prayer. Self-defense with a firearm is also accomplished (on the lowest estimate) 100,000 times a year. As you can see, gun violence isn’t always a bad thing.

Something that is always bad is violent crime. I rather like the saying “The initiation of a threat of force is evil.” That means someone attempting to rob someone else is committing an evil act. Someone invading another person’s home to do them harm is an evil act. Someone committing murder is an evil act, and one that happens all too often. It is the evil act that needs to be gone. We can surely all agree on that.

That’s step one in any kind of argument: finding common ground. Now that we’ve completed such a step, we should look at how we can be rid of such evil acts.

God has demonstrated numerous times that He does not universally intervene in the paths of bullets, so praying for intervention is not a reliable method. Additionally, men have demonstrated numerous times that they will commit evil with anything available: Cain slew Able with a rock long before the invention of metal alloys made modern weapons available, Casey Anthony murdered her daughter using a chemical and duct tape, Ming Yingjun stabbed 22 children and an elderly woman (though none died, this is still an evil act), Timothy McVeigh used a truck bomb to murder 168 people, and the 9/11 attacks used transportation methods to kill thousands.

This demonstrates that focusing one’s view on a particular type of weapon is wildly ineffective. It also demonstrates that one can simply never be rid of evil acts.

Can we mitigate the number of innocents harmed? Well, sometimes. Local and federal governments are currently setting the standard on terrorism, bomb detection, and child abuse, but that still leaves us with the threat of attackers wielding weapons from rocks to firearms.

In most cases, single attackers can be stopped by inflicting so much pain that the attacker no longer views his target as worth the trouble. Martial arts and less-lethal weapons have become popular for this reason. This is not 100% effective, as the proliferation of brain-altering drugs can cause the person’s pain threshold to be beyond the point of death. Another instance of this being ineffective is the mentally-unstable person who seeks fame by inflicting as much pain and suffering as possible before committing suicide or being killed by police. Such people thrive on the 25/8 sensationalist news coverage of their evil acts.

The first type can be solved by disabling their bodies’ abilities to continue. This is why Tasers have become popular; their electrical charges render *most* people immobile and easily subdued. If Tasers were 100% effective, though, police wouldn’t feel a need to carry firearms.

Type 2 is a little more tricky, as the recent trend shows people using firearms to shoot innocents in areas known as “Gun Free Safe Zones,” which is the most unfortunate and intentionally misleading name ever concocted. Those committing evil acts either commit suicide upon the first show of armed resistance or force a large group of police to fire upon them.

Take a moment to read that last sentence again. “The first show of armed resistance.” This shows that a part of the person’s brain is working perfectly, as the person feels an immediate fear of the intense pain one experiences when bullet wounds don’t immediately kill. There is no fear of jail, as the person plans to die before ever wearing cuffs; the fear is of living with that terrible pain.

We, as a gun-carrying citizens who train with our tools, are perfectly capable of providing that terrible pain long before the person’s evil acts become news worthy. Why? Because we are much more numerous than law enforcement personnel. We also do not announce ourselves with uniforms that can be seen from any angle or cruisers parked in front of locations.

Sure, some of us open carry. I’m a known advocate for that method of carry, as I can comfortably tote a full-sized handgun with a standard capacity of more than 15 rounds and a very long sight radius (this makes accurate shots easier). We still do not wear navy (or black or tan) uniforms and drive a police cruiser. The person committing an evil act has no way of knowing whether or not his target has armed individuals.

Except, he does. The rise in businesses and public buildings banning carry of firearms has made finding a target very easy for the criminally insane. This is why so very many shootings happen in schools in the Northeast as opposed to the aisles of a Tennessee Walmart. The difference? The lunatic knows that the school is defenseless.

Hopefully, this long message will cause a little bit of thought in your mind. That is really all I could ever hope to accomplish. Stay safe, and God bless.



One thought on “Open Letter to Religion-based Gun Control Advocates

  1. A society that is not armed is easier to subdue. I believe that guns are just a tool with a greater efficiency than other methods that are easily obtainable. Obviously, WMD (bombs, gases, etc) are the fastest way to create mass destruction. However, guns are probably next in line. That being said, guns are simply a tool used for whatever act you deem necessary for that particular tool. If you so wanted, you could turn the gun around and use the grip/handle as a hammer to drive a nail. Similarly, we have all (at one time or another) used a butter knife to tighten a flat-head screw. All of these devices are tools. A tool is used for a faster more efficient result in whatever we deem necessary to be done.

    Any violent act is a tragedy. Even those in self defense are horrible. The loss of life is sad. If we abolish guns, crime will still happen. It will just not happen at the same rate of destruction that it “may” with the use of a tool with a greater efficiency. Violent crimes are not limited to one tool (a gun). They exist because the attacker is sick (mentally or physically). We cannot keep limiting tools and classifying them as “evil” simply because harmful results happen with said device. Are we to ban forks because obesity is rampant? Are we to ban fertilizer because it can be mixed to create bombs? Should we not have backpacks because they are as a carrying device for said bombs? NO…we should take a hard look at the reasons people commit crime and work on a viable solution for those issues.

    You can ban whatever you want. Crime will happen. There are good and evil forces that work every day. We just need a better safety net for diagnosing the “evil” prior to those forces being left to their own tools and devices!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s