In the wake of two more tragedies,
while both sides staunchly defend their beliefs, I firmly believe that both
sides (I’m talking about voters rather than lawmakers) want the same thing: a
reduction in these tragedies.
There IS, therefore, common ground.
The question, though, is this: what
measures actually make sense? Congress is GREAT at writing “feel good” laws;
those laws that happen IMMEDIATELY, while accomplishing nothing (often doing
more harm than good). They pass a law…ANY LAW….then pat themselves on the back,
having accomplished only one thing: giving the voters a false sense of security…
…until the next tragedy.
I recall this line from “Ghostbusters”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbgTm9JLhtc.
Sounds like Congress. And, sadly, it’s pretty much what we, the voters, have,
complacently, come to accept…..
Knee-jerk, Pavlovian responses are
equally worthless. Decide in haste; regret in leisure.
The question is this: what ACTUALLY
would work, while preserving every part of the Second Amendment? There ARE
solutions.
If we can manage to have the wit to
avoid the “feel good” and the “knee jerk”, I’m willing to bet that we could
yield some real results.
IMO, solid first steps might need to
include:
1. The realization that guns are a tool and NOT animate.
Just as a vehicle, without a driver at
the wheel, is incapable of mass destruction, so is a gun dependent on the
intention of the operator.
2. The realization that NO gun control law will
stop mass killings. Those intent on destruction will use whatever tools are
available. The 9/11 terrorists used box cutters and airplanes. McVey used a
truck filled with ANFO. In other countries, mass murderers have used fire, “melee”
weapons, poisons, vehicles, etc.
3. The realization that banning any one type of
weapon is meaningless. Of course, “assault weapons” are the favorite target (no
pun intended) of gun control advocates. But, according to the FBI (Uniform
Crime reporting), in 2016 (as an example) “murder victims by weapon”, firearms
accounted for 11,004 murders. Of those, rifles (including, but not limited to,
AR15 type weapons) accounted for 374 of those murders. The Washington Post
listed, in an article compiling mass shootings, types of weapons used. AR15
type rifles accounted for a modest fraction. So, a ban on AR15-type “assault”
rifles (a misnomer) would not have much effect on reducing gun homicides. The
stats tell us that if those weapons are not available, others will be used; and
not necessarily guns.
4. The realization that NO gun control laws,
written to date, have prevented ANY of these horrific crimes.
5. Perspective. Under the Obama administration,
the CDC conducted a study of gun violence. Among its conclusions, it found that
defensive use of guns is common, though not always reported. The report
estimated that between 500,000 and 3 million crimes were prevented, every year,
by the use of a gun (does not include police-involved incidences, and includes mere
brandishing). Taking the low number, in order to achieve 1:1 equity with gun
homicides, that 500,000 would need to be halved, halved again, halved again,
halved again and halved again, then reduced another 5,000. Perspective.
If a sensible, reasoned discussion
can be had with these in mind, I believe that sensible steps CAN be taken to
reduce gun violence.
Here is, in my humble opinion, some
of what I would like to see:
IMMEDIATELY ACHIEVABLE:
-
National reciprocation in concealed carry laws. Another conclusion from the CDC report found
that armed citizens are less likely to be injured by an attacker. In addition,
mass shootings tend to have fewer (potential) casualties when the attacker is engaged
and fired upon.
-
An end to “gun free” zones. Nearly every mass shooting has taken place in
designated “gun free” zones. And, no wonder. Why on Earth would a gunman (or
gunmen) choose to confront an armed citizenry? Criminals go after what they
perceive to be easy, soft targets.
-
Along similar
lines, I’d like to see legislation that
would allow those educators who choose to carry concealed, and are trained to
do so, be allowed to. I would NOT make this a mandatory thing, but rather
an individual, voluntary thing.
LONGER TERM:
-
I would like to
see FAR stronger background checks for
mental health. Admittedly, this would be a very difficult issue, since
mental health issues are complex and varied, BUT it MUST be addressed and achieved.
-
Make mass shootings a Capital Offense (irrespective of number of casualties).
-
Tax legislation, to develop private-side pools (taking
donations from individuals and corporations) to fund and maintain armed
security for public and private schools. I’d also like to see deeper tax
reductions (1:1 in dollars) if those companies hire military and police.
I am convinced, based on available
evidence, that these steps WOULD work.
I encourage all, Conservatives and
Liberals, to engage in this conversation. The conversation MUST start with the
people; that means you and me. Waiting for our legislators to adopt anything
except “feel good”, “knee jerk” solutions will only lead to more meaningless,
ineffective laws and no reduction in tragedies.
Don’t we have enough meaningless,
ineffectual laws? Or do we need more, so that we can feel good?
