Guns: Common Sense vs. Nonsense

Rarely a week or even a day goes by when we do not read or see a story concerning preventable deaths caused by firearms. Acts both criminally intentional and totally accidental are committed on a regular basis. Mass murders at schools, places of worship and shopping centers vie for space in the print media and airtime on broadcast media and cable alongside serial snipers, victims of domestic violence, cop killer ambushes, murder/suicides and every imaginable form of accident involving people of all genders, age groups, religions and mental states.

Many of these deaths and injuries are needless and highly preventable. Passing common sense legislation – or at least not passing laws that any person with even a modicum of common sense will see as disasters waiting to happen – could easily reduce their occurrence. The fact that our government has been so hesitant to break this cycle of preventable death and destruction is a testament to the undeserved power of the gun manufactures and their main lobbying tool – the NRA. That too many politicians fear losing their positions if they cross the NRA is testament to the fact that for far too long we have been letting the inmates run the asylum.

Every Constitutional Amendment contained in the Bill of Rights is considered to have reasonable limits. Freedom of Speech does not allow one to falsely yell “fire” in a crowded theater or instigate a riot. But to the radical guns rights advocates, there are no limits to the right to bear arms under the 2nd Amendment which they recognize as valid. They oppose laws that try to limit the types of guns available, the amount of ammunition that a clip can hold, the age of the user or the places in which a firearm may be legally possessed either openly or concealed.

Just about every other dangerous activity or item that can be a safety hazardous when used has come to be regulated to some degree. Food, medicines, alcohol, motor vehicles, appliances, you name it – all need to be inspected and determined to be safe, and often operators are required to meet certain qualifications to use them. Penalties are imposed for improper use of the items and some cannot be legally obtained by people who do not meet the criteria set by the government for their possession and use.

True, many states and localities, as well as the federal government. have passed legislation restricting certain people (convicted felons, for example) from legally possessing firearms. Certain types of weapons have been illegal for decades – fully automatic guns, for instance. Illegal weapons can still be obtained, and people who aren’t supposed to have them can still find ways of getting them. The same is true of illegal drugs and other contraband. People can also still drive a vehicle when they have exceeded the legal blood alcohol level. Not every crime can be prevented. But why fail to at least take reasonable precautions to limit the damage that may be caused and punish those who violate agreed upon limitations?

I have a problem with states that find it acceptable to require a passenger in a motor vehicle to wear a seatbelt, but refuse to require someone on a motorcycle to wear a helmet. Seatbelt laws are obviously not easily enforceable, just as cellphone usage while driving isn’t. I see people driving all the time talking or texting and getting away with it. Likewise, people obviously go into bars armed with guns. You read about the shootings in the paper on a regular basis. But is that a reason to pass legislation that specifically permits people to go drinking and carrying a loaded weapon? Guns and alcohol certainly do not mix any better than driving and alcohol do. Not allowing you to carry a gun everywhere you go under any circumstances is not a violation of your right to own and bear arms.

Read More: Gun Control: Common Sense Vs Nonsense