W ith all the conversation recently the position I take on gun control may be unpopular with some of our readers, but America has had enough gun violence and it is time to do something about it.
I am not sure what the correct course of action is, but there is little to no reason why someone should need semi-automatic rifles. Why not place a ban on the sale of these particular guns? That at least slows down the source for weapons which have little worth other than taking life.
It is a stretch of the imagination to think that the government would seize personal weapons, and with that premise I have no problem registering all the guns I own. To be honest they already are registered, through insurance.
Our nation is in a crisis because of the decay of our society. Respect for others and their rights is almost non-existent. The idea that anyone would go into a school and kill innocent children is abhorrent, but in this society it apparently makes sense to the people who do it.
This week leaders are discussing whether to arm teachers so that if something happens they can be first line defenders. I think that is like identifying someone in church to be the designated shooter. First, if you are that chosen person, you do not know what would happen if you were faced with having to shoot someone. I think that is one of the big fallacies about having a designated shooter in church--or schools. Will this person make the decision to kill someone if they have to? Then if you arm teachers you are asking them to decide to take a child’s life. That is not what they signed on for.
Politicians run for the hills when gun control issues surface for fear of losing funding from the National Rifle Association or having their scoring impacted. Our position is-- so what?
We have an obligation to protect our citizens and having weapons that are good for nothing other than killing a lot of people is practical only for criminals.
Another issue that has to be addressed is the question of who should be able to buy weapons. If you are old enough to serve in the military--18-- you should be old enough to have a weapon. But then, you argue, you should be old enough to buy a beer also, which is illegal until you are 21.
More discussion centers on whether a buyer is mentally fit to own a firearm. So how will the government define mental illness? Is anyone who ever took medication to settle their nerves mentally ill? If that were the case, a large chunk of the population would be ruled out as gun buyers.
Then you have to go after the folks who drink because alcohol is a mind altering substance. And you can not argue that alcohol does not play into many situations of gun violence.
I think more than anything that real gun control comes through having good morals and values and a concern for other people. Until that condition returns we will continue to see problems.
