A Rational Approach to Guns in America

I suspect this’ll get read by about 7 people–mostly because it’s not about how to score more points in sports AND because no one wants to be reasonable about guns.

Anyways, at the GAMA Trade Show, my spot was next to a table with someone much further to the political right than me on the spectrum, but when discussing history and education, it’s impossible to avoid political discussion–including an equal lament that education at all levels has been politicized and turned into a political tug-of-war rather than letting teachers teach. That is a different story.

So. the other person in this–we’ll call him Bob–he’s a gun owner, has a concealed permit and even carries the firearm when he goes to church twice/week. He owns a .357, a 9mm Glock, a Browning, a revolver, and a shotgun. Bob, though, doesn’t just own guns, he practices with them–not just shooting, but the maintenance and handling. He owns a gun safe and when the gun is not on his person, the guns are secured where access by children is impossible. And that’s really where our conversation started.

Bob believes the 2nd Amendment permits people to own any gun they want but he doesn’t like that provisions for gun training are neglected. So together over the course of a couple days, we figured out some points of agreement–things that OUGHT to be a basis for fixing gun issues in Amerca:

• If you own a gun, you should be required to get training with it. So you want a rifle–you have to show you received ‘rifle education’. A handgun would require ‘handgun education’. This would be no different than taking driver ed. Driver ed is required because cars can be dangerous–guns can be dangerous, too, so why not require equal education?

• Ammunition designed to penetrate bulletproof armor should be outlawed for non-law enforcement personnel.

• If guns are for citizens and you have to be 18 to be a citizen, then guns should be restricted accordingly. You gain a right to possess a firearm when you gain your right to vote.

• Felons are not permitted guns..

• If you commit domestic violence, your gun ownership rights are reviewed and potentially suspended or lost.

• Individuals requiring drugs for mental health issues should have their ownership rights restricted.

• Though it constitutes news, the name of shooters should not be publicized and details which make an incident newsworthy should be limited by media–in much the same way streakers/people going on a game field are not shown on TV any more (which reduced their occurrence drastically).

Now, you may not agree with all of these, but…they become points of rational discussion. I’m generally anti-unlimited gun ownership (because I know why the NRA agitated for that in 1964 and in the 1970s with Harlan Carter) but Bob–who is fervently pro-ownership agreed that these rules/ideas wouldn’t take away from the 2nd Amendment.

So why can’t people discuss this stuff rationally? (Yeah–I know….because of political donations…)