I'm very divided on the issue of the second amendment.

I'm a guy who loves guns, used to shoot competition, and currently has no firearms.

I figure, in the current climate, that if I really need one there will be plenty lying on the ground. Most likely next to a conservative who viewed it as a fashion statement.

We need to rethink our love affair with firearms. As I mentioned, I like guns. But if we could end mass shootings by removing the ability to own guns, or significantly curbing that ability, I would never again carry or try to carry a firearm.

I am aware that these two positions do not line up. I'm no fan of cognitive dissonance, but I find myself engaging in it on this subject. I think there is a solution, somewhere, and I'm working on some ideas in that realm.

First, though, the modern "second amendment" screamin' hypocrite would not have been allowed a firearm in the America of my youth. The idiots at the Michigan State House, for instance. Not because of "rights", but sheer adolescent bullshit. The famous photograph shows four people about to shoot each other if shit does hit the fan. No trigger discipline, no strategic or spatial awareness, and no brains.

I learned to shoot in Wyoming, where nearly everyone was armed. Being competent with a gun was a sought after rite of passage for the youth of that state, at least the southern part, regardless of sex.

Note that. Competent.

Most of these ... whatever the fuck they are... that are causing all the ruckus are not competently armed. They have high capacity weapons in their hands, and a no capacity weapon between their ears.

If you are in possession of a machine that is designed to kill, you had better be competent, moral, and capable. There needs to be a way to determine and enforce that, or we are going to devolve even more quickly.

To the point of the article, most definitely people of color should be carefully and competently armed. It's whites causing the trouble. As usual.