This is prompted by a Facebook post by my son Christopher (http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/christopher.chuvala), who wrote there :
First off, let me say that I think gun control won’t be very helpful. Criminals will get their guns just like how drug users get their drugs. Second of all, I think all of you activists “fighting to protect for second amendment” are getting upset over nothing. What is gun control? It is not taking your guns away, but instead it is making it harder for people such as the mentally unstable to get guns. Only you can take that right away from yourself.
I like the way this guy thinks. ;)
But I think the reality of gun violence prompts us to dive a bit more deeply into the effectiveness of the whole notion of “gun control” as has been promoted and legislated in 20th- and 21st-century America.
I think there’s no denying that unstable/sick/evil people can kill more efficiently with high-capacity firearms than with most any other readily available weapon. But the reality is that it is only law-abiding NON-unstable/sick/evil people who are affected by gun control legislation.
Short of amending the Constitution to rescind the 2nd Amendment (despite my more paranoid friends’ fears, I don’t see this as possible apart from the consent of the governed), gun ownership and use will never be removed in this country. So it’s reasonable to expect that the unstable/sick/evil will always be able to commit their horrific acts, regardless of “controls” we pass into law.
What we can do, I think, is address those that don’t fall into either of those categories, namely criminals who who are not law-abiding, but also are not unstable/sick/evil a la Sandy Hook et al, but do use firearms in the commission of crime. And it’s proper that this should be the area of our focus, as many more people die at the hand of gun-wielding low-life thugs than by the acts of insane people.
I propose that mandatory sentencing, e.g. a 10 year minimum for ANY violent crime commited while in the personal posession of a gun whether it is used or not, and a 20 year minimum for any crime in which a gun is discharged in the act, MIGHT be a deterent to punks, gangsters, and the like.
That’s the kind of legislative control that could actually benefit the country – make the consequences of misusing firearms mandatory, severe, and life-altering — without exception. Leverage the legal system we already have to control criminals instead of servicing pipe dreams that controlling gun ownership would have any effect on the unstable/sick/evil.
The utter futility of the current “Gun Control” philosophy, and a suggested replacement
This is prompted by a Facebook post by my son Christopher (http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/christopher.chuvala), who wrote there :
I like the way this guy thinks. ;)
But I think the reality of gun violence prompts us to dive a bit more deeply into the effectiveness of the whole notion of “gun control” as has been promoted and legislated in 20th- and 21st-century America.
I think there’s no denying that unstable/sick/evil people can kill more efficiently with high-capacity firearms than with most any other readily available weapon. But the reality is that it is only law-abiding NON-unstable/sick/evil people who are affected by gun control legislation.
Short of amending the Constitution to rescind the 2nd Amendment (despite my more paranoid friends’ fears, I don’t see this as possible apart from the consent of the governed), gun ownership and use will never be removed in this country. So it’s reasonable to expect that the unstable/sick/evil will always be able to commit their horrific acts, regardless of “controls” we pass into law.
What we can do, I think, is address those that don’t fall into either of those categories, namely criminals who who are not law-abiding, but also are not unstable/sick/evil a la Sandy Hook et al, but do use firearms in the commission of crime. And it’s proper that this should be the area of our focus, as many more people die at the hand of gun-wielding low-life thugs than by the acts of insane people.
I propose that mandatory sentencing, e.g. a 10 year minimum for ANY violent crime commited while in the personal posession of a gun whether it is used or not, and a 20 year minimum for any crime in which a gun is discharged in the act, MIGHT be a deterent to punks, gangsters, and the like.
That’s the kind of legislative control that could actually benefit the country – make the consequences of misusing firearms mandatory, severe, and life-altering — without exception. Leverage the legal system we already have to control criminals instead of servicing pipe dreams that controlling gun ownership would have any effect on the unstable/sick/evil.