HOME | DD

Description
As many of you probably know well, I get into a lot of debates - sometimes very heated - on the internet about social issues. One of the ones that comes up a lot is gun safety, especially in abortion debates; i.e. "If you really cared about kids being killed, you'd ban guns."

Now, do I think getting guns out of the hands of criminals would be a good idea? Sure, if you could just Thanos snap it into reality. Fact is, though, criminals aren't going to obey gun laws. If they're willing to shoot up a bunch of kids, they're not going to give a (bleep) about it being illegal to steal a gun. Some other measures have marginal success, but in the end the surest answer to a gun in hands you can't trust is, and always will be, a gun in hands you can.

On the other hand, those who oppose firearms as a defense for soft targets do raise three arguments worth considering. One: guns in a school, even in right hands, can potentially be stolen. Two: Not all faculty at a school, church, etc. can, should, or would be willing to use a gun to defend their students. Three: Even if Two weren't a problem, the time and cost of arming and training so many teachers would be prohibitive.

After much consideration, I came up with this idea. I originally likened it to a game of Russian Roulette (from the view of a potential shooter), until a customer at work suggested naming it from the view of the target itself. I don't recall exactly which of us first said "Silent Angels," but as you can see I liked the name.

I don't expect this to actually take root in most governments, largely because I think it could actually work. Nor do I think it's a perfect answer; no human effort will ever be. Still, it's here at least for anyone to comment on. Enjoy!

Description
As many of you probably know well, I get into a lot of debates - sometimes very heated - on the internet about social issues. One of the ones that comes up a lot is gun safety, especially in abortion debates; i.e. "If you really cared about kids being killed, you'd ban guns."

Now, do I think getting guns out of the hands of criminals would be a good idea? Sure, if you could just Thanos snap it into reality. Fact is, though, criminals aren't going to obey gun laws. If they're willing to shoot up a bunch of kids, they're not going to give a (bleep) about it being illegal to steal a gun. Some other measures have marginal success, but in the end the surest answer to a gun in hands you can't trust is, and always will be, a gun in hands you can.

On the other hand, those who oppose firearms as a defense for soft targets do raise three arguments worth considering. One: guns in a school, even in right hands, can potentially be stolen. Two: Not all faculty at a school, church, etc. can, should, or would be willing to use a gun to defend their students. Three: Even if Two weren't a problem, the time and cost of arming and training so many teachers would be prohibitive.

After much consideration, I came up with this idea. I originally likened it to a game of Russian Roulette (from the view of a potential shooter), until a customer at work suggested naming it from the view of the target itself. I don't recall exactly which of us first said "Silent Angels," but as you can see I liked the name.

I don't expect this to actually take root in most governments, largely because I think it could actually work. Nor do I think it's a perfect answer; no human effort will ever be. Still, it's here at least for anyone to comment on. Enjoy!