Common ground on the big gun debate? I think it’s possible.

This past couple of months I have been seeing politics in a very different way. From being a hardcore conservative Trump supporter to now an Independent freethinking American, who doesn’t follow any human being with blind loyalty. This weekend was the March for our lives protest, a movement that stood for ending gun violence in America, especially in schools.

As I log on social media, particularly Twitter, you see the comments between the right vs the left in regards to this march. I see both sides very passionate about their convictions. From the words I read, the comments I am hearing, the messages from both parties are not being articulated accurately and are not being received accurately. This is why there is such a divide in America because no one wants to work out the issue at hand. There are false narratives on both sides that are spreading like wildfire when it comes to core issues, especially on the 2nd amendment and on gun control.

The more I learn when talking to liberals and Democrats about wanting in gun control is, that they do not want to ban on all guns but want gun reform. Yes, there are some who do want to repeal the 2nd amendment but the majority, as well as progressives, does not want to invade your homes and take all your guns away. They, as well as many on the right, do not want someone who is mentally ill to be able to purchase a weapon. After a lot of discussions that I have had past few months, I understand why they feel that the NRA is a problem. It can be a legitimate concern if money from these lobbyists are influencing politicians, why nothing is being done to make it harder to obtain a Military-like weapon. This is the message from Democrats and liberals that should be talked about than the lies of wanting to take all of your guns away.

Those who oppose feel banning any weapon infringes on the 2nd amendment to the United States Constitution. Any change to the United States Constitution makes it vulnerable to being obsolete to allow a tyrannical government to take over. Many say it’s the 2nd amendment that keeps the rest of the amendments intact. A lot who oppose the March for our lives protest explains that there is a difference between the AR 15, the weapon that many want to be banned and the M16 and other assault rifles. One big difference is the fact that the AR 15 is a semi-automatic compared to the M16 fully-automatic. The AR 15 is like any regular civilian pistol, it just looks intimidating. The protesters will argue back that the bullets of the AR15 and how fast it shoots is what does the damage compared to most civilian guns. In fact the creator of the AR 15 intended the weapon to be a combat Military weapon when it was created.

As you can see, many valid points to these arguments. I think this issue can’t be fixed overnight. People of both views have to take it down a notch and work on this together. Honestly with facts on both sides, I haven’t made up my mind on this issue. However, I support the Parkland kids to use their free speech Constitutional right to make their voice heard, and I support the 2nd amendment and it shall not be infringed.

About the Author
David Weissman was born in New York and served in the US Army for 13 years, with two deployments to Afghanistan. He is now married with 3 daughters and is a free lance writer after making Aliyah to Israel.
Comments