(updated 4/18; added links to external sites and a ps; text remains the same)
I despise guns. Having had one pointed at my head on one occasion, I'm not speaking in a vacuum. But never mind that.
Before we get to the proposal, click on the lovely image to the right to see a (non-violent) video that explains how quickly a 9mm semiautomatic can be repeatedly fired and reloaded (answer, 0.25 seconds and 2 seconds, respectively). Alternatively you may read up on it on Slate's Explainer. Then, try reading aloud without pausing for a breath the following words that describe the loading of a Revolutionary era musket:
To load, a soldier opened his cartridge box, grabbed a cartridge, bit off the end to expose the powder, and poured a small amount into the pan of the lock, closed the pan, dropped the cartridge (powder first) into the barrel, removed his rammer, rammed it home, returned his rammer, and then "made ready" to shoot by cocking his lock, and "presenting" or pointing, his piece to the enemy. There were no sights, just the bayonet lug near the muzzle. The soldier just looked down the barrel. Soldiers were expected to be able to fire a shot every 15 seconds for at least 4 minutes before needing to slow down because of the fouling in the barrel.
(Thanks to: Glenn and Georgeanne for the above text which I 100% did not ask permission to use and for all I know they threaten their children with an elephant gun if they don't pray hard enough -- j/k G's! )
I would like to propose the formation of an unlikely alliance between those of us who believe that the right to "the pursuit of happiness" goes hand-in-hand with a sense of personal responsibility and those individuals, present or future, who as a result of yesterday's massacre in Virginia will feel their voice reinvigorated whenever they speak of "the right to bear arms" being their favorite words in the Constitution (the argument going something like "if the students / teachers / everybody had guns the killer would not have been able to take out more than one or two people").
The proposal is as follows: People who are for the de-criminalization of drugs (be it possession or use) and any other victim-less "crime" (the defining characteristic being that there is no answer to the question of "who is directly harmed?") will from this point on also become ardent defenders of the Second Amendment.
Similarly, in keeping with an intellectually consistent and honest philosophy, Second Amendment supporters will become equally vocal supporters of the repeal of all laws criminalizing victim-less activity, as per the right to "the pursuit of happiness". (Folks, trust me, you have more to gain from this offer; nobody ever died because somebody accidentally dropped a joint.)
These two things must travel together in order for the words that define the USA to make sense, and it is the only way that both groups can have their way honestly.
Either that, or we could just repeal the Second Amendment. There is certainly a precedent for that sort of thing.
-------------
[redacted]
