Controlling Gun Control

Had any talks about gun control recently?  I have.  Have you seen people suddenly hate you for not taking their side?  Crazy, huh?  Gun control is a sore subject for everyone, and it's a sure-fire way to make enemies. I've seen mostly two arguments: on one hand, you have the argument that our country was formed on the very basis that citizens have the right to protect themselves from their government and therefore have the right to own guns;  on the other, you have people saying there is no reason to own a gun used in combat by soldiers.


I read this in an article from CNN:

‎"Outspoken gun-control advocate New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg called the (NRA post-Newtown) statement "a shameful evasion of the crisis facing our country... instead of offering solutions to a problem they have helped create, they offered a paranoid, dystopian vision of a more dangerous and violent America where everyone is armed and no place is safe," he said. "Enough. As a country, we must rise above special interest politics."

The NRA spokesperson LaPierre gave a frightening speech.  He painted a "paranoid, dystopian vision" for sure.  He made it sound as though we were living in a post-apocalyptic world where everyone on our block just found out we have the only surviving box of twinkies, and they're all coming to gun us down to get it.  

Now I don't believe that we live in the crazy, paranoid society that he does.  I do understand the point that he, in my opinion, failed to correctly make.  That we are entitled to the means of protection for ourselves, family, and property.  If some crazy person breaks into your home and steals your stuff, and threatens your family, I believe you have every right to stand up to them.  And that if a tyrannical government ever arises, we should have the means to protect our freedoms.  That was the purpose of the second amendment: it gave Americans the right to form a militia.  But in the last five years, the Supreme Court has ruled that it means personal ownership of guns, not militia.

Going back to two of the most common arguments I hear: no reason to have military style weapons and the right to protect oneself from a tyrannical government.   If we have the right to own military style weapons to defend ourselves, shouldn't we be entitled to the same access to weapons as the government?  Meaning, shouldn't we be allowed to purchase Apache helicopters, bazookas, predator drones, and RPGs?  Because if I understand it correctly, a private citizen can't own an F-16 or artillery like the military has.  We don't have tanks.  So if the government decided to attack its own citizens, owning an AK-47 or AR-15 isn't going to do much when the artillery and drone strikes begin.  They aren't going to be effective on a tank.  So we're pretty much screwed anyway.  If there are already weapons that the government has that citizens don't, what's wrong with saying, "you can't get these ones either"?

The NRA says that violent video games and movies are to blame.  And yet, countries like Japan consume more video games each year than the US.  T hey're playing the same games.  Grand Theft Auto, Left 4 Dead, Mortal Kombat.  And they watch American movies.  And yet, last year, Japanese men and women did not feel the need to kill over 10,000 of each other like Americans did.  In fact, you can count on one hand how many gun related deaths occurred in Japan.


Do violent video games and movies warp young minds and create thoughtless killers?  I doubt it.  Do they contribute to the degradation of the perception of life?  Probably.  But what can you do? Go into every American's home and take away their movies and video games?  Ban the production of them?  Isn't that infringing on someone's first amendment right?  

Now, I understand that the vast majority of gun owners are responsible, law abiding citizens.  I understand that stricter laws will only punish the law abiding citizens, and a black market will be created for newly banned guns.  I understand that it is impossible to seize every military-style gun in homes across the country.  I understand that crazy people will find a way to get a weapon and wreak havoc on society no matter the laws. I also understand that everyone is considered a "responsible" gun owner until their kid finds their gun laying around and shoots his/her friend with it. So what are common sense measures that can realistically be done to bring down the gun violence in America?  

I don't know.  I don't think anyone really knows.  But isn't it worth trying something? Anything?  Hasn't enough American blood been spilt?  President Obama this week gave 23 actions that he intends to put in action to fight gun violence.  Most of the actions were about enforcing laws that already exist and reminding people that they exist.  Ironically, the NRA criticized Obama for ignoring all of their ideas they gave him after he did many of the things that the NRA has been calling for for years.  LaPierre believes "the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun."  Perhaps once it's escalated to that point, yes, he's right.  But was anything done to maybe prevent the bad guy from getting a gun, or from getting so upset that he reached for that gun?

Only time will tell if any of Obama's solutions will work.  I personally would say that increasing spending on education is worth a try.  Have better training for teachers to spot bullying in schools, or anger issues in students. Employ more school counselors.  Have programs that help children deal with anger and emotions.  Since parents are apparently not teaching their children about action and consequences and the difference between right and wrong, train teachers better at instilling students with a moral compass.  Every time spending cuts need to be made, education is one of the first programs to get passed through the wood chipper.  How about we cut back on all the wars we're raging and use that money to teach kids about peace.  We're already paying taxes for that, why not get a better return on investment?