I’m sorry Mr. Matthews, but I’m not sure even the “sensible” side of myself agrees. For evidence of the political longevity of gun control I need only point you in the direction of Chancellor Adolf Hitler of Germany. The Third Reich took the guns, and a population unable to defend itself was slaughtered.

Now if you were going to make a logical argument, instead of an emotional one accusing the NRA of using race or hate tactics, I would say something like this:

90% of Americans are merely concerned for their well-being. Most of us DO NOT want a gun in the hands of a criminal. However, it has been shown, time and again, that it does not matter what sort of government regulation is slapped on something people are just going to go ahead and do what they do anyway. Take for instance, marijuana, a schedule 1 drug, for more than half a century it has been illegal to grow, sell, and produce in any other way Cannabis in the united states. However, the pot culture survived this. Prohibition? That didn’t last too much more than a decade, and many Americans took it upon themselves to become bootleggers and moonshiners.

Now, how do we prevent criminals from ever breaking the law again? Maybe instead of requiring a worthless “background check” that’s just a stepping stone to an outright ban given enough criteria are weaseled in there. First its anyone with a criminal background. Then if your parents had a criminal background. Anyone that’s ever been outside of the U.S. could “reasonably” be another criteria.

Now, juvenile rhetoric aside, Mr. Matthews, how do we compromise in a way that would keep guns out of the hands out of criminals on the streets, AND ensure that the power-addicted criminals in Washington don’t take guns from 90% of “sensible” Americans?

Oh, and us 10%, we apologize for not having the “sensible” attention span of a rodent.