|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
More Opinions about Gun Ownership I want to thank the many people who wrote about their passionate views on gun ownership, safety, gun controls, legislation, enforcement and the "Million Mom March". I've personally learned a great deal from all of you about the complexities of this issue and hope you have, too. We need to discuss this subject openly and do all that we can to increase everyone's safety by keeping guns out of the hands of felons, unstable people and children. Several people also asked me to underscore the importance of safety regulations and practices when handling, using or storing firearms. What follows is an additional sampling of reader letters. I received so many that I was unable to include all of them, so I selected a variety of ideas, points of view and factual information for your consideration and further study. Jim writes: It seems that there is a countermarch brewing. A million pistol packin' Mamas would like to voice their opposition to the gun control craze. Here is a link to the beginning discussion thread: http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3872505221c4.htm *** Betty writes: I am a 55-year-old grandmother who believes that more gun control laws will not deter criminals and will only harm the person who does not break the law in the first place. We must deal swiftly and harshly with anyone who breaks the law. I blame our judicial system in being too lenient. We also need more control of our children. They are in control in many households and fear nothing. I don't understand why the press so strongly supports the First Amendment, and stretches it to include profanity and pornography, but is so quick to throw away our Second Amendment rights. Australia had recently banned guns and guess what? Their crime rate has soared. The criminal has no fear of even entering a home that is occupied. England also has banned guns. I'll bet George Harrison would have like to have some protection against the intruder in his house. The police just can't be there at all times. I'm sure you receive a lot of letters on this subject, and I thought you'd like to see one from a woman for a change, against gun control. People are afraid of anything that they are not familiar with, and being ignorant about guns, demonize them. *** Al writes: Banning private ownership of firearms will not reduce violent crime. In fact, the opposite is true. When common citizens (male or female) are armed, crime is reduced. The reason crime goes down is that criminals are afraid of getting shot. When you remove that fear from a criminal's mind, you enable that criminal to rob, rape and kill with impunity. The average male weighs 180 - 200 pounds; the average female weighs about 130 pounds. How many effective ways are there for a woman to defend herself from an attacker almost twice her size and strength? In this light, a firearm has no equal. Where I think we do agree is in cases where accidental discharge of a firearm causes injury or death. This must be addressed immediately. My solution to this is education. Because of the high number of people whose only exposure to firearms is from movies, practical knowledge is next to nil. In rural households, where firearms are a fact of life, children at a very early age learn not to touch a gun. Around the age of 7 or so, they learn how and when to shoot. Those children grow up with respect, not only for firearms but also for others. They do not grow up to be criminals. This is what is missing today in the cities. We have advanced our knowledge in many areas, but in some vital areas we have grown stupid. As you debate this issue with readers, please do not let emotion control you. Try to look at it logically, and debate the facts. This is a complex issue that deserves honest, rational discussion. *** Recommended reading from another reader: More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws, by John Lott, Jr. Guns: Who Should Have Them? David B. Kopel, Editor Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control by Gary Kleck *** Mark commented: Did you know that Hitler, Stalin and Chairman Mao were strict gun control advocates? That is why they were able to murder millions of people. No one had the weapons to stop them. Any government that can take away your weapons, can also take away everything else. Don't say it can't happen here. It surely can happen here. The Soviet Union never had any invasion plans for North America. The reason? They feared a well-armed American citizenry. I like to keep the tyrants living in fear. I think it was Thomas Jefferson who said that the tree of liberty must be watered once in a while with the blood of patriots and tyrants. *** James wrote: My name is not 'Buford.' I am Jewish and reasonably well-educated (B.S. from Cornell University and M.S. from M.I.T.) My parents remembered the holocaust, and taught me what the Nazis did to unarmed and helpless Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto and the abattoirs of the camps. I am also a gun owner. I own ten handguns, two rifles, and a shotgun. In a temper of pure contrariness, I recently placed an order for an "assault weapon". Before obtaining this gun, I will undergo, for the 14th time, a background check by the Attorney General to certify that I am reasonably sane, have no criminal record, and am not a danger to myself or others. How this 14th certification will prevent crimes of passion is a mystery: should I go mad and decide to kill my neighbor, one of my existing weapons will do the job admirably. The "background check" for people who already own guns can serve no purpose other than pure harassment. Recently, the Los Angeles County Supervisors voted to disallow gun shows on county property. Imagine! People are actually gathering peacefully to buy and sell guns, as if that were perfectly normal and legal. Which, of course, it is. The individuals voting against gun shows have obviously never attended one. I have attended many, and here is what I found A completely safe and non-threatening environment. Parents letting their kids run free--without worry that someone will grab them and spirit them away. Women are respected. Voices are rarely, if ever, raised. The gun-show ban is only the latest manipulation in a propaganda war designed to demonize gun-owners and supporters of the Second Amendment. Reasoned debate is the last thing the anti-gun crowd wants: they rely upon emotionalism and hysteria rather than logic. The anti-gun crowd is perfectly dishonest. They say, for example, that "13 children a day" are "killed by guns". In order to derive this number, they assume that everyone under 21 is a "child". The vast majority of "children" who die by gunfire are gang members, who are murdering each other in wars over money, drugs, and turf. But it is far more important for the anti-gun zealots to invoke a false image of innocent six-year-olds being gunned down in the street. Logic and facts would reveal, for example, that there are 60 million gun owners in the U.S., and approximately 200 million firearms. 99.5% of all firearms are never used in any crime. For 223 years, the United States has had a large number of firearms without massacres like that at Littleton or Granada Hills. Guns, in fact, were more readily available before 1960 than now--and such rampages were rare. This suggests that it is not guns but other factors that lead to these killings. Professor John Lott of the University of Chicago has shown that ownership of firearms actually prevents violent crime. But the debate is no longer about logic and facts. At a recent dinner party, I mentioned in conversation that I own guns and shoot them as a hobby. A shocked silence descended on the room. It was as if I had casually admitted a taste for human flesh, or a rare sexual perversion as yet unapproved by Hollywood. Guests eyed me suspiciously, as if I might at any moment produce a weapon and begin "spraying" bullets. In point of fact, having been repeatedly certified by the State Attorney General as a solid citizen, sane and non-violent, I am one of the least likely to perpetrate an outrage. But all of the current gun-law frenzy is directed at other law-abiding gun owners and me. The present hysterical drumbeat against firearms is dangerous on many levels. It demonstrates the corruption of American political debate, and the debasement of education. Citizens are no longer taught the meaning or purpose of the Bill of Rights, and critical thinking skills are actively discouraged by the schools--in favor of 'feelings' and non-rational discourse. The Second Amendment says, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." This is plain language, and before the Left deconstructed America, its meaning was clear. And anyone who has studied the Federalist Papers cannot avoid the conclusion that the Founders clearly intended for private citizens to have the right to keep and bear arms -- without interference. Yet the Second Amendment, like those other stepchildren of the Bill of Rights, the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, is simply ignored. But the Bill of Rights is not a Chinese Restaurant menu: you may not choose those rights you admire and reject those you deplore. If the gun-control crowd had an ounce of honesty and integrity, they would forthrightly admit that their goal is to outlaw all firearms and confiscate them. Then they would straightforwardly propose--and work to get ratified--an Amendment that repeals the Second Amendment. But they know the American people would never vote to abrogate a part of the Bill of Rights. So they prefer the incremental, "boiled frog" approach--achieving by stealth and gradualism what they cannot obtain openly. To call this strategy "dishonest" is an understatement. *** Statistics from Project Exile (began in Richmond, Virginia about a year ago.) Another reader sent in these statistics: Project Exile mandates a 5-year prison sentence without possibility of probation or parole for felons caught in possession of a firearm. Project Exile mandates a 15-year prison sentence without possibility of probation or parole for felons caught in possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime.
*** Darryl says: If mothers wish to reclaim this country as a safe place to raise their children, they can begin by reclaiming their children. Don't let the fact that accidental gun deaths have been decreasing for 10 years and that school violence is at an all time low deter you. It is far easier to repeat the media's pabulum than to research the facts yourself, and to pander to the media's "if it bleeds, it leads" editorial policies. Mothers can begin by closely reviewing what their children see, hear and do. Violence in their musical choices, violence in the movies they see, violence "training" in simulators we have chosen to call video game entertainment (the military uses virtually the same equipment for their training), etc. When was the last time a mother actually listened to one of her son or daughter's CDs or played one of their videos? Children are given over to the "media" for the nurturing that parents seem ill prepared or unwilling to offer to their children. Two income homes are the norm, leaving the new generation of children to fend for themselves. As much as I deplore the use of tort law to establish societal evils, I am beginning to support the notion that the parents be held fully accountable and responsible for the actions of their children under the age of 18. That, in my opinion, would mean financial compensation for the victims and prison time for parents found culpable by virtue of their neglect of their children's supervision. This type of rigorous responsibility would perhaps reignite, by coercion, a family unity that seems to be missing in most every case of child terrorism covered by the media. Rearing your child is a commitment the mother and father should be making before deciding it would be "nice" to have a couple of kids! I have had it up to my eyeballs with people trying to affix blame on society or others for their actions and responsibilities. When will the finger of blame be redirected back to the individual? *** For people interested in the opinions of the NRA on these issues, go to: http://www.nra.org.
Please send questions or comments to bbruno@snet.net. Previous columns are available. | |||||||
 ©1995-2004 SBC Knowledge Ventures. All rights reserved. Legal Privacy |
