How deep we have sunken. One respondent to an article criticizing the incredibly high number of automatic assault weapons in the hands of US citizens, claimed that guns are not the problem, just crazy people and evil murderers. He claims that gun regulation deprives us of "our freedoms." Under his logic, anyone is a "dumbass" who advocates reasonable safety regulation. There is no reason to encroach on our "freedoms." No reason for preventing food manufacturers from putting rat poison in food, no reason why pilots should be licensed or regulated [anyone should be able to fly any plane they want to anywhere they wish, right?] and no reason to limit semi-automatic assault weapons in peaceful rally sites where there are young children.
I do not see anyone advocating elimination of gun ownership, just reasonable regulation of who can purchase and how they can be stored and used. The historical facts surrounding the Second Amendment only call for a regulated militia, not for individual ownership of guns with a right of individuals to carry concealed weapons in crowded pubic areas in time of peace. Yet folks as crazy as Loughner have a knee jerk reaction any time someone mentions the idea that maybe we don't need assault weapons in Safeway parking lots. Some of those folks argue that everyone at the Meet Your Congresswoman event should have been armed and opened fire. [Loughner would probably have been killed, along with a couple hundred other people in the crossfire.]
The idea of "common welfare" suggests that we create as a society areas or zones where certain conduct is prohibited for the benefit and safety of all. If I go to a gun range, I can expect to see guns and maybe get shot. If I wander in the woods during deer hunting season, I assume some risk. But I should not have to expect danger from Glock 19 pistols at the local Safeway. I do not think it unreasonable to require that, if you own a gun, you must be responsible for it and have it inspected and accounted for each year just like cars and emission certification. Then if a gun is missing, it will be known. The owner would bear responsibility for not securing the gun against loss or theft. I do not think it unreasonable to require trigger locks to prevent accidental injury by children. Most gun accidents come from children playing with unattended weapons. The problem is that extremist gun ownership advocates attack even the most reasonable protections. They demand the right to misuse of weapons, in the name of protecting gun ownership. That seems absurd. Does my right to own a car include a right to be reckless and to run down anyone I choose? Of course not. And it is hard to imagine that even the founding fathers would have contemplated the Second Amendment as authorizing the use of guns for people to walk into town meetings and start shooting everyone in sight. All perspective is lost.
Quite simply, it is time to stop the duplicity. If Loughner was deranged and mentally unstable, then why was he able to easily purchase a Glock 19 and large magazines for $500 locally? If he is the sort that should NOT be able to own and use such weapons freely and easily, then it is clear that the existing regulations are not working. If guns should be allowed "for legitimate" sporting purposes, what "sport" involves use of an automatic assault weapon in a supermarket parking lot? The "justifications" for rampant gun toting have risen to the level of the absurd, at the same time that the death rate from guns in the United States is THOUSANDS times higher than other developed countries. If we are not to restrict gun toting, should not all buildings and public establishments be equipped with metal detectors so that at least everyone will be alerted to the fact that a gunman is present?
There are no easy answers, but putting more guns on the streets clearly is NOT an answer. Like nuclear arms reduction, the survival of our society calls for disarmament. There is a need to reduce gun ownership and restrict areas and ways in which guns can be stored and used. Perhaps then public servants will only need to fear free speech expressions against them in the form of heckling, and not from the burst of an assault weapon.
No comments:
Post a Comment