Gun control advocates would have you believe that the general population is too mentally unstable to exercise their Constitutional right to keep and bear arms. When gun law liberalization rears its righteous head, they claim that easier [legal] access to firearms would encourage the crazies. Traffic incidents would turn into bloody shootouts. Drunken arguments would escalate murderous conflicts. Bill O’Reily will go ballistic. Fire and brimstone. Dogs and cats living together. The fact that it hasn’t happened in any statistical relevant way in any of the dozens of states that have restored firearms rights during the last decade or two has nothing to do with it. Apparently. But c’mon, admit it . . .
when you’re angry you like to go off and bust a few caps. Well, I don’t. And no one I know does. But surely the act of shooting a gun is inherently violent and violence is anger and why would society want to put a dangerous weapon in the hand of someone who has anger issues (which shooters must have because they’re shooting a gun)?