Equilibrium

Too bad none of those kindergarteners had conceal and carry permits.

Guns don't kill people. People with guns kill people.

I'm not going to post either of those as Facebook updates. They're too harsh, too on the nose, too crass.

Here's the deal: we (currently) live in a country with as many guns as people, most of them concentrated in the hands of a few people who really like guns. Most of those people don't want to get rid of their guns because, hey, they're responsible (and they are) and guns are fun (also true, again for some people) and they cost a lot of money. People who own guns probably feel safer, even though statistically they aren't, and that sense of security is something many people cling to.

I understand.

I also understand that if you outlaw guns when there are so many guns out there already the only people who will have guns will be the criminals. We've saturated enough of the market that changing the gun laws now will result in a disequilibrium condition for some number of years in which gun violence will rise, disproportionately affecting law-abiding citizens.

I don't like the equilibrium point we're existing in right now, though. I don't like living in a place where a certain number of public places will just get shot up every year. With this equilibrium condition we have to simply accept the 30,000 gun deaths every year. Is that really where we want to be as a society? I guess so.

My fear is that the "equilibrium" in which we currently reside isn't really an equilibrium. My fear is that we're trending toward a society in which it becomes increasingly necessary to own and carry a gun. My fear is that we're becoming a dystopia in which the second amendment right for militias to arm themselves turns all of us into de facto militia members or nameless, faceless victims of violence.

Again, glad I'm moving to Australia.