Obama said two things regarding the recent supreme court decision:
- He agrees that the 2nd amendment is an individual right
- But he also thinks local government should be able to place restrictions on guns to keep them out of the hands of “gangbangers and children”.
My question is simple: exactly what made him think anyone wants those people to have guns? Of course those people shouldn’t have guns.
Gangbanger implies a record of doing something wrong. And I do agree that if you’re convicted of engaging in some sort of gang-oriented activity you should maybe temporarily lose your right to carry a gun (perhaps for a few years?). That seems fair. But the key is that it’s due to a person doing something wrong, not just as a blanket policy.
He also mentioned children. Um, children shouldn’t have guns. It’s illegal for them to have guns. It should remain illegal for them to have them. I’m not sure why we’re talking about this.
I think Obama is saying that too many people have guns that shouldn’t have them. And in that case I’m in total agreement. But law-abiding citizens should be able to own and carry them as desired, assuming they get licensed and trained according to local regulations.