The recent shooting of Melanie and Scott Hain has led a lot of people to mention that “those who live by the sword die by it.”  It’s troubling to me how quickly people assign blame to firearms when anything bad happens.  Melanie openly carried her pistol to her 5 year old’s soccer game recently, and she shocked a lot of people.  I’ll grant that openly packing to a kids’ soccer game is not a smart thing to do (but only because our current society has gone so far away from responsible firearms use).

But consider a couple of facts of this case that are being ignored by many:

  • Reports are now coming in that Melanie didn’t shoot her husband.  Instead, she was shot by him.  So it seems she may have had a very good reason to arm herself.  If she was worried about her husband’s mental state, she probably should have done more than arm herself (like leaving), but we really don’t know the reason she armed herself or what she thought of her husband.
  • Her husband worked as a parole officer.  He was law enforcement!  How many times has the anti-gun crowd said that  ”only law enforcement can be trusted with guns?”  I’m not trying to single out law enforcement — its members are usually responsible.  What this shows is that stupidity can come from any group of society, and the “police should be the only ones” argument is simply dumb.  Citizens can be just as responsible, and they can be just as irresponsible.

A person who is “living by the sword” is not one who carries a sword (gun) for personal protection.  In my opinion, living by the sword is using a weapon routinely in one’s lifestyle.  It is living the gangster life.  I saw this exact lifestyle as a missionary in the inner city of Chicago.  I can attest that there is a huge difference between a citizen who packs a weapon for personal protection and a gangster who lives by his weapon.

We are entering a world where people want no responsibility.  They want the government (or whoever) to take care of them.  To provide health care.  To provide security.  To bail their businesses out.  To provide food and clothing.  To ensure success with no risk.  They want to live in a Disneyland-type world.

I take issue with this kind of attitude in adults.  Adults should learn to be responsible.  Kids are a different story.  I have no problem providing these things to kids whose parents don’t provide it.  Although I do wish it were provided by voluntary charities which people made voluntary donations to rather than by forced taking from the rich to poor.  But regardless, I support it for kids.  In particular, I support public education and school lunch (at least the kids get one meal each day).  For kids who have deadbeat parents, public school provides a level playing ground.  It’s what helps a kid with deadbeat parents eventually succeed.  It is the foundation of the American dream.

In the war in heaven before this Earth existed, two plans were presented.  One provided for responsibility, failure, redemption, and learning.  The other guaranteed success with no risks but with no learning or progression.  Which plan does the current trend sound like?