Second Amendment Kills 2 In South Carolina


Let’s see how many cliches I can fit into one paragraph, shall we? Gun rights advocates have sayings. “Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.” However, a “law abiding gun owner” takes aim. He “exercises his second amendment rights”. When the “good guy with a gun stops the bad guy with a gun” at a church in Texas, suddenly an inanimate object can kill. “The second amendment saved lives.” It’s all fun and games until the second amendment kills 2 people in South Carolina.

Here’s the story. Father and daughter are hunting in the woods. They are “deer driving”. I was unfamiliar with this practice. Hence, I googled. Big Game Logic describes the practice as follows.

An underrated and frankly, more exciting way to hunt deer is by driving. Driving is simply walking through thick cover to move deer out of their hiding places and into other hunters. 

So father and daughter are walking through cover, hoping to flush deer out towards hunters in a clearing in front of them. Moreover, this clarifies the first question the story raised. How does one mistake a 9 year old for a deer? Answer. She was in a place where deer were believed to be. The place offered enough cover for deer to hide. She is moving in this environment which obstructs the view of hunters who are presumably unaware of her presence and intentions. Thus, seeing movement where deer are believed to be, they fire. A 9 year old girl and her father bleed out in the woods.

The second amendment kills 2 in South Carolina.

America’s casual relationship with guns.

With this knowledge, it’s easy to understand the mistake. Furthermore, it’s incomprehensible that deer driving is considered to be a legitimate hunting practice. What could possibly go wrong? This wasn’t exactly unforeseeable. However, the general insensitivity to the dangers guns present doesn’t end there. A family friend said the following.

How some simple hunting trip can turn into a tragedy is beyond me. I don’t know how it could possibly happen.

See what I’m saying? They were walking around in the woods shooting guns. What could possibly go wrong? However, the casual attitude towards guns doesn’t stop there. Again, the girl was 9 years old. In 7 years she could drive a car. She would have to double her age to be considered an adult. Furthermore, she would need to be 12 years older to buy a beer or a pack of smoked. However, at 9 she can take a gun out in the woods shooting.

The second amendment kills.

Gun rights advocates have a nice racket going. When Stephen Paddock legally purchases guns, he is abiding by the second amendment. Furthermore, he is abiding by the same when he takes them to a gun show. However, when he fires into a crowd of concert attendees he is breaking the law. Hence, I can’t call him a legal gun owner? Fine.

In this case, you have an accident. Therefore, the shooting isn’t a crime. Moreover, you have a legal gun owner exercising his second amendment rights. Thus, the second amendment killed these two people by any analysis that credited it for saving lives in Texas.

This militia isn’t well regulated.

A 9 year old girl shouldn’t be allowed to participate in hunting. Hunters shouldn’t obscure themselves during hunting season in places deer are believed to be hiding. People shouldn’t be surprised that shooting guns in the woods presents risk to others in the woods. All of this is basic common sense.

We need gun regulation. Your right to keep and bear arms falls within the context of a well regulated militia. Should Jack Wilson be able to provide armed security for his church? Yes. The second amendment saves lives when it allows that. Should children be allowed to participate in armed sport? No. The second amendment kills when it allows that. I don’t want to violate the second amendment by taking your guns away. I want to respect the second amendment by regulating your militia.

Leave a Reply