Stricter gun control needed
In light of the recent shooting at Chardon High School in Ohio, everyone has perfectly clear 20/20 hindsight. The boy needed help and all of his Facebook posts point to his loneliness and depression. People claim that the school should have recognized his troubles earlier on and helped him overcome his issues. In the end, however, no one can ever predict such tragedies, nor identify the students who will do them. Witnesses say that the boy was targeting a specific group of kids, including a teen that his ex-girlfriend was now dating. This makes it seem like a rather pointed attack, and his actions deliberate. In this case, he would have had to have planned out where to find or purchase the handgun. While we do have a constitutional right to bear arms, in light of this tragedy and others similar to it, the argument can be made that there should be tighter regulations on how those guns are purchased and what can be done with them.
The guidelines for purchasing a new gun today are, from the point of view of the customer, that one walks into the store, picks out a gun, and comes back after the store after the proper documents have been processed/approved. The dealer must ask for a photo ID and for the purchaser to fill out form 4473, which is kept on file at the store permanently. Depending on the state, the store may ask for other personal information. Some require purchasing firearm locks, proving that the customer owns a gun safe, or requiring that the customer pass a test before they are authorized to purchase. Many of these regulations seem very levelheaded and logical, but a few requirements, such as taking mandatory gun handling and safety classes, undergoing a psych evaluation, or acknowledging any children or teens that would be in contact of the weapon, should also be considered as new policies.
These laws, however, only apply to the licensed, store-to-customer sale of new and used guns. They do not apply to the personal/private sale of a gun between two people. This is a serious issue that needs to be addressed as guns could pass from a cleared person to one who has not been approved to use it. While there are papers transferred that are involved with ownership, the same regulations and authentication necessary for/in public sales should be enacted in private sales. Some people may argue that such government regulation on private affairs would infringe upon citizens rights, not to mention be added hassle for those who are well intentioned, but as we have seen in the case of past school shootings, guns in the wrong hands, without the proper clearance, can be deadly. Think about what would have happened if it were your brother or sister who had been targeted, or our campus that had been attacked.
Rules on their use detract from the “wild West” mentality of the United States, but times have changed since the cowboy needed a gun to protect himself on the frontier and hunt his food. Nowadays, we have grocery stores and significantly less wild-animal encounters. Americans’ rights to own, carry or purchase firearms should not be taken away, it just needs to be retailored to this day and age. Using computer technology and communication, firearms could be more easily monitored: it’s as easy as putting information into the computer that can be logged by a government database. But, above all the shouting for change or against it, our most immediate thoughts and prayers should be for the families of the victims of the Chardon school shooting.
“Many of these regulations seem very levelheaded and logical, but a few requirements, such as taking mandatory gun handling and safety classes, undergoing a psych evaluation, or acknowledging any children or teens that would be in contact of the weapon, should also be considered as new policies.”
This is absurd. I own many different weapons and I have taught my kids how to shoot them. Throughout our history, children have had the ability to shoot weapons without incident. In the 1800s and early 1900s kids had their own .22 rifles! My 14 year old son has his own “assault rifle” that we shoot often.
My children understand the consequences that guns can produce, but it’s not the gun’s fault. They don’t shoot themselves. Responsible adults teach children to be responsible shooters…period. I carry a gun EVERYWHERE I go and my kids have seen me in very heated arguments and not once have I ever even acknowledged I had a firearm. They are taught that problems aren’t solved by just shooting people, but through discussion – heated or otherwise.
What you fail to recognize is that gun control doesn’t work, as shown in this case. The school is a “gun-free zone” so this shooting should have been prevented through these gun control measures. Why didn’t it? Because gun control only works for those that follow the rules and, then, to their detriment.
“Many of these regulations seem very levelheaded and logical, but a few requirements, such as taking mandatory gun handling and safety classes, undergoing a psych evaluation, or acknowledging any children or teens that would be in contact of the weapon, should also be considered as new policies.”
Citizens have a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms, and just like any other Constitutional right citizens should not have to take courses or psyche evaluations or be prevented from exercising because a teen or child lives in the home.
“They do not apply to the personal/private sale of a gun between two people. This is a serious issue that needs to be addressed as guns could pass from a cleared person to one who has not been approved to use it.”
Most criminals obtain firearms from Street/Illegal sources, so placing more regulations of the private transfer of firearms will do nothing to reduce crime.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fuo.pdf
Furthermore, firearms rights have been expanded over last several years, and more citizens are now free to carry firearms in more places. Yet, homicides, including homicides with firearms, as well as all other violent crime have been decreasing since 2006. Moreover, after a dramatic increase in firearms sales and ownership after the last Presidential election including an increase in first time firearms purchases and an increase in firearms carry permits, gun ban groups and zealot predicted that there would be a corresponding increase in murders. However, the U.S. homicide rate decreased from 5.0 per 100,000 in 2009 to 4.8 per 100,000 in 2010.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl01.xls
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl01a.xls
We do not need additional gun control laws.
“Think about what would have happened if it were your brother or sister who had been targeted, or our campus that had been attacked.”
Claire, if one of you had a brother or sister killed by a drunk driver, would you support reacting prohibition? Just as prohibition was a failure, gun control has failed to keep firearms out of dangerous persons worldwide, and citizen disarmament zealots ignore the fact that it has been found that there is no correlation between firearms ownership and homicide or suicide rates, and many of the countries with the strictest firearms prohibitions have higher homicide and suicide rates than nations without such restrictions.
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
“Rules on their use detract from the “wild West” mentality of the United States, but times have changed since the cowboy needed a gun to protect himself on the frontier and hunt his food.”
Criminologists have found that U.S. citizens use firearms for self-defense 2.5 million times a year. Any further restrictions on lawful firearms would only turn the 2.5 million survivors of crime into victims.
http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/KleckAndGertz1.htm
“…it’s as easy as putting information into the computer that can be logged by a government database.”
Firearms registration does nothing to stop crime, and the only reason citizen disarmament zealots are calling for it is because they hope such lists can be one day be used for firearms confiscation like has taken place abroad and even in the U.S.
“…our most immediate thoughts and prayers should be for the families of the victims of the Chardon school shooting.”
We can all agree on this.
Your argument is well-composed. However, if we want to eliminate school shootings, we need a historical perspective. Israel suffered several school and school bus attacks by terrorists until teachers were permitted to be armed. The result? No school or school bus shooting since. The infamous Montreal Massacre was committed by an insane women-hater who was able to pass stringent Canadian background checks. Another Canadian school massacre by a licensed individual was averted only because an armed police officer happened to be present on other business. Canada has the comprehensive background checks the American gun control advocates dream of, but even those controls cannot prevent a determined killer.
On the other hand, several school massacres–and at least one church massacre was averted by the presence of individuals with concealed-carry permits.
Moreover, schools with long-standing rules permitting concealed carry by students and staff have never had a school shooting. And, the military base shooting of a few years ago happened only because US soldiers were disarmed in that specific location.
It would be nice to live in a place in which madmen and criminals had no access to guns–or knives–or explosives–or hammers–or hockey sticks. But, unfortunately, this is a fantasy. In reality, history clearly shows that when “bad people” know that armed law-abiding citizens are present, the “bad people” select a different location. Gun-free zones are invitations to a massacre.
The same thing happened in Belgium last year when a man threw some grenades and started firing an automatic rifle in a crowd of Christmas shoppers. The guy injured over 100 people and killed several. Belgium is basically a Socialist state and has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world. No one could believe that it happened.
Sorry OP, but there is no simple answer to gun violence. Even if the government spent a few million on an advanced computer system that tightened law enforcement agencies’ grip on guns, that will never alleviate the painful and desperate socioeconomic conditions that disturb individuals and cultivate violent actions.
“On the other hand, several school massacres–and at least one church massacre was averted by the presence of individuals with concealed-carry permits.”
Please provide source and dates. Thank you.
Murder is already a felony.
Bringing a firearm to a primary school is already a federal crime.
Persons under 18 can’t buy firearms and persons under 21 can’t buy handguns from dealers.
Concealing a firearm without a permit is a crime in Ohio.
None of these laws prevented the shooting.
The evidence shows that more laws would not have prevented this and will not prevent future violent crimes involving firearms.
Criminals have no respect for the law.
Are you a blatant propagandist or an idiot?
It seems strange that we shouldn’t pass more and more restrictive gun laws do to the fact that there is less “wild-animal encounters” than in the past. I did some research and to my complete surprise the author of this article is 100% correct. There were far more “wild-animal encounters” in the past. Furthermore, scholarship of that era revealed that in the 18oo’s gun ownership was justifiable do in a large part because of all the “wild-animal encounters”. In fact scholars of that day seemed to think that part of the 2nd amendment must have somehow been erased overtime. Today, I am totally willing to disarm. I can no longer justify my ownership of firearms because, “wild-animal encounters” are nonexistent in the city I live in. I have no need to defend myself or my family from crack fiends, heroine junkies, and or speed freaks that seem to populate every large city in America. No more “ wild-animal encounters” my posterior!!
The shooter didn’t buy the gun or pass a background check . We don’t try to strengthen drivers license procedure when somebody runs somebody over on purpose . It is a tragic event but tighter gun control is not the answer . How did he get the gun into school? How did he acquire the firearm . Many things are overlooked people are always quick to blame gun control. Take away guns and people will just use some other form to kill . Keep trying to take guns away and it will cause the black market TO flood guns to the wrong people . We really need to strengthen home values and security at our schools.
When I was in Iraq, we noticed that every household was well armed with pistols and at least one or two AK-47 rifles. They were seldom used for criminal purposes. The preferred weapon of choice in war or crime was bombs. I think that Americans can be even more adept than Iraqis in the bomb making skill, and would be if guns were ever restricted. Currently, violence and gun accidents are way down where law abiding citizens can bear arms in and out of the home (Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice /Bureau of Justice Statistics).
More lame laws that would not deter criminals. Gun control — especially when the shooter was never adjudicated mentally unstable or is not on record for criminal activity — does not work. Remember, Jared Loughner was never arrested for his many incidents of threatening conduct or marijuana use and possession. That was the fault of at least three law enforcement agencies that kept blowing him off. Had Loughner been arrested — just once — he would have been given a mental assessment and a certain diagnosis of severe schizophrenia. The existing safeguards that have long been in place would have red flagged him after accessing his NCIC record through the National Instant Check System. Loughner would have been forbidden from purchasing a gun, extended mag, and ammunition at the point of purchase.