So, as
always after a mass shooting, the calls for gun control begin.
Now, understand,
I am not a fan of guns. I don’t like
hunting; if I’m in danger I’m going to feel a lot more comfortable calling 911
or even just screaming rather than trying to unlock, load, lock, aim, and shoot
a firearm. On the other hand, I have
been to a shooting range a few times and really enjoyed the challenge and
competition of target shooting (in the same sort of way that one enjoys
striving for and getting a strike in bowling; so maybe we could all just go
bowling together).
Nonetheless,
it doesn’t really matter whether or not I favor guns, because we have the
Second Amendment which provides for the right to bear arms. I don’t particularly like this amendment, but,
then, there are people who don’t seem to particularly like the first amendment
or various other parts of the Constitution.
I defend the Constitution to them, and so I do the same to myself for
the Second Amendment, because certain parts of our Constitution are not more
important than others. We cannot pick
and choose which parts of our Constitution we will enforce and follow – it all
carries equal weight and as citizens we must defend it in its entirety.
But, here’s
the thing – why do we only seem to hear the screams for gun control after a
mass shooting. Why don’t we hear similar advocacy every day when we have
thousands of shootings across the country and especially in big cities like
Chicago. Children are injured and die
there almost every day from gunshots, so where are the screams for better gun
control there and why not on a daily basis?
Better regulation of gun and ammunition sales to the people who use guns
daily seems to make a lot more sense than trying to figure out a way to keep
guns from the hands of a mass murderer who, until the time of the heinous act, appears
totally sane and normal and who, until the act, avoids discovery of whatever
plans and motives he or she might have.
We have the Constitutional
right to bear arms. That right can be
reasonably regulated. So let’s aim our regulations
at the everyday people who commit the everyday murders that kill a lot more
people over the course of the year than any single mass shooting. Personally,
I don’t think we can ever create background checks that will catch all or even
nearly all people who should not have guns.
And I don’t think prohibiting guns to the insane will prevent gun violence
from those who appear sane until they suddenly snap. And then there’s the plain fact that there’s
probably already enough guns out there for every citizen to have at least
one.
So, what
would I do? First, make it much harder to purchase ammunition. I think it may be easier to buy a quantity of
ammo at Walmart than it is to buy spray paint.
A gun is not going to be much good without ammo (and yes, I know there
would be a black market and people could make their own, but it would at least make
acquisition somewhat more difficult which might delay or even stop some gun
violence). I would also ban some of the
types of guns that are currently available.
I would allow small pistols, etc. for self-protection, basic rifles for
hunting, guns for target shooting.
Beyond that, do we really need to generally sell the warlike weapons
that are now easily available? (I do realize that there are some good arguments for a Yes answer to this question) At least
make then much harder to purchase with significantly greater restrictions than
the basic guns.
That’s what
I’d do, though honestly I don’t think it would make much difference. People who
want to kill with guns are going to find a way to do so. I know it is a cliché, but the problem is not
the guns. We seem to have a growing
number of people in this country who see violence up to and including murder,
as a way to solve problems. We seem to
have more and more people who do not value human life. We have a country that is filled with
divisiveness and anger. It is this
sickness of the soul that needs our attention far more than, or at least
concurrent with, revisions to our gun laws.
I'd point out that the Second Amendment in no way protects hunting guns. Military and defensive guns only.
ReplyDeletecheers, erich martell
P.S. - I saw a movie once where only the police and military had guns. It was called "Schindler's List."