[Magdalen] A gun control legislation conversation.

[M J [Mike] Logsdon]

Nothing bad, but I'm genuinely surprised.  My lead and co-worker, J, responded to yesterday's news with the horrible saw of "Gun control laws won't stop this from happening."  As her elder, as a master of the English language (sic sic sic), and as a priest, she definitely listens to what I say.  I didn't disagree with her.  What I did say was along the lines of "Even Obama says we obviously can't stop the lone wolves totally.  But since gun control leglisation has nothing to do with second amendment rights (which, by the way, are not about the right to carry semi-automatic killing machines into local restaurants just because some states say you can), we HAVE to start somewhere, in order to catch up to the STARTING POINT of other civilised countries -- and by the way, that means all of them -- and at least make gun ownership as bothersome yet doable as everything else we take for granted.  We have the right to own and drive a car, but not without a license and insurance.  You and I enforce floodplain regulations, which many consider a "taking", but our answer is always that they are in place to preserve and protect against unmanaged and damaging development in areas that could otherwise become death traps during even minor flooding events.  It's not about guns.  It's about requiring every member of the body politic to behave in a way that remembers that without said laws, asshol*s get these high-powered killing sticks and shoot up elementary schools much easier than without them.  Sum it up as having your president come into the White House press room to talk about such things, every other month or so, instead of what feels like, and often is, actually every month.  Obama knows he'll have to do it again.  But he doesn't want to keep his notes in his pocket so as to be ready at the drop of a hat."

She more or less got the point.