People who oppose changing gun laws like to point out simple
but irrelevant truths.
If you took away all of the guns, you would still have some
killings. We know that and it is beside the point.
Airplanes and cars and loads of fertilizer all can be
dangerous in the wrong hands. We know this, also. But we also know that all of
these things have purposes that do not involve killing a large number of people
very quickly. We have restrictions on who can fly a plane, who can drive a car,
and, I imagine there are usually some restrictions on purchasing large amounts
of certain fertilizers.
The terrible events of 9/11 caused some real changes in
airport security for everyone.
Yet, there are those among us who think they should be
allowed to buy and own assault-style weapons whose only purpose is killing
large numbers of humans very quickly. To take away their right to own such
slaughter-weapons is somehow against their constitutional rights.
So much for a load of fertilizer.
All rights have limits. My favorite is the First Amendment,
the one from which all other freedoms flow. But, I know that even that is not
absolute. The First Amendment does not give you the right to incite violence, to
spread certain kinds of false information, to slander the innocent, and so on.
We accept those limitations and realize they do little or nothing to make the
First Amendment less meaningful and effective.
The Second Amendment is vague and poorly written and was
created in a time when there was no standing army, when rifles fired one shot
before reloading, and when one of the things that a militia might need to be
called up to mitigate would be a slave uprising.
It should likewise have limits. I am sure there are those
who think they should be allowed to have nuclear weapons or stockpile nerve gas
in their basements if they so choose because: Second Amendment. Most of us see
that as crazy. So we know the line needs to be drawn somewhere.
If we are going to draw a line, how about drawing it here:
Let properly background- checked civilians own the pistols and rifles they need
for hunting and home protection, and even for target shooting. But draw the
line between them and the properly qualified and trained military, who would be
the only people with automatic rifles, grenade launchers, and missiles.
I don't think that what I am proposing would infringe on anyone’s
Constitutional right to protect themselves. I don't think this is hard to
figure out. Let's treat the couplet of mass-shootings that took place last
weekend the way we did 9/11.
Let's make some real changes to the gun laws of this land,
and let’s do it soon.