“Folks often say that doing something about guns would be worthwhile “even if it saved only one life.” Yet that concept, while noble, often is not a driving force in societal decisions. We could do many things that would save one life, or many lives, but we don’t always do them.
We don’t do them because here in the real world there are acceptable levels of death. That’s a reality to keep in mind as we do constitutional balancing acts that involve things an overwhelming percentage of people enjoy and use responsibly but a few use irresponsibly, illegally and with horrific results.
Guns are like that. But so are other things.
I’ve never owned a gun, have never hunted and would move to another city or line of work if I felt a need to be armed for self-defense. But some folks like to hunt. Some folks like to shoot at targets. Some folks like to collect firearms. Some folks feel the need to have guns for self-defense. And some folks have a visceral hatred for all guns (and perhaps gun owners) and wish they’d all disappear. Guns don’t seem to attract much ambivalence.”
Read the rest of the article via Ken Herman: Guns, rights and acceptable levels of death | Dallas Morning News Opinion and Editorial Columns – Opinion and Commentary for Dallas, Texas – The Dallas Morning News.