Gun Control

The Case for Gun Control

Here are the reasons I favour gun control:

I know he is dead now, but would you want that loon in the photo in the top left as your neighbour?
I have been shot at too many times. As a child I was shot at with BB s, 22s, pellet guns and arrows. As an adult I visited Portland during an NRA (National Rifle Association) convention, and was shot at with rifles on three separate occasions by drunks driving around in cars. On another trip to Portland I was in a restaurant when police broke in and made us lie on the floor while they had a fire fight with a criminal gang. When I lived in San Francisco, every night you could hear gunfire from the nearby projects. None of these people intended to kill me. They were just being childish jerks playing with guns.
Every night on the news is some not-fully-intended shooting. Sometimes it is random drive by, sometimes a bystander, sometimes an accident, sometimes road rage, sometimes somebody who had a mental breakdown. None of those shooting would have happened were there no guns. They were spur-of-the-moment crimes. Never once have I heard of a civilian using a gun to prevent a crime. That guns can be used to prevent crimes is a macho fantasy of losers. It is as childish as putting on a scarlet cape and dancing about pretending to be Superman.
To me, a gun is just another weapon. People who have large stashes of explosives in their apartments are either not right in the head or are up to no good. Sooner or later they will kill someone.
The sort of people who amass guns are the very sort of people I trust least: Republicans, racists, homophobes, whacko Christians who believe in talking snakes, gang members, loner teens, people who like killing animals for pleasure…
Statistically the person killed by a gun in your house is far more likely to be a family member than an intruder. Keeping gun in your house is tantamount to attempted murder. To keep a gun, you must have malicious intent against your own family. It akin to keeping oily rags or barrels of explosives in the basement.
It often extremely hard to convict a criminal beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if he is carrying an illegal weapon, it is an open and shut case that takes the criminal off the street. Refusing to make guns illegal ties police hands. They can be 100% sure the suspect is guilty with no way to incarcerate him.
Just today there was a report of an 8 year old who committed premeditated murder, killing his father and uncle. That was a completely preventable crime. It was a completely unnecessary crime. That gun had no purpose other than some perversion of the father to compensate for his tiny penis. He used it to bully others and feel powerful.
Target shooting is just a sport, not a sacred right. You can still do it with non-lethal weapons, kept locked up at a gun club when not in use.
Most of the guns gun used by criminals the world over come from the south eastern United States where gun laws are most lax. The United States is a bit like a hippie who grows a giant crop of dandelions and can’t understand why anyone else thinks it is any of their business.

Levels of Ban

I personally don’t approve of hunting, but I think it would be excessive to ban it. Hunting should not be conducted with concealable weapons, automatic weapons, or weapons with more than 6 rounds. The bullets should not be capable of piercing armour. This would make hunting a much safer sport since hunters could wear Kevlar to protect themselves from fellow hunters.

I think it is reasonable to have gun-free zones, for example airports, police stations, sporting events, political rallies, malls, theatres, bars, bowling alleys, schools, amusement parks, restaurants… This is not that different from the old west where the cowpokes had to check their six guns at the bar. It is one thing to cache weapons at home and another to go out looking for trouble with them. Basically I think the owner of any establishment should have the right to make it a weapons-free zone. Further, if are shootings on the property, a judge should have the right to declare a property a weapons-free zone, including private homes.

I think it reasonable to insist that any weapon transported on a vehicle be carried in a locked box, disassembled and separate from ammunition. There in no legitimate need to shoot from a moving vehicle.

Constitution

In the United States the issue is complicated by the second amendment of the constitution. For Americans to get serious about gun control, they would need to change their constitution, or at least reinterpret it, which supreme court decisions have twisted far from its common sense meaning.

The constitution is a document written in times very different from today. People today are just as wise as then and should be permitted to choose how to run their society and change the constitution to say whatever the consensus pleases. However, in the meantime, the literal meaning of the second amendment should prevail:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
~ Second Amendment

That is all it says. It says nothing about concealed weapons, nothing about weapons that had not yet been invented at the time, nothing about the right to shoot intruders, nothing about the right to organise for the purpose of armed insurrection, nothing about safe storage, nothing about registration, nothing about weapon design…

The way I read it, it is a states right clause, giving the state the right to keep a militia, with people keeping their weapons at home and bearing them for militia duty. Consider the times. States were very suspicious of each other and of the federal government overpowering them. They were in a position like today if the USA and Europe formed a common political union. I know this is not the current legal interpretation, but it is the literal common-sense meaning. If it meant some blanket right, the first clause would not have been included.

There was a news item that Americans are stocking up on all manner of guns fearing the new Obama administration will restrict their use. They want a chance to hide them before the sale and possession becomes illegal.

It is odd that folk who claim to worship the constitution are so clearly planning the break the law. The hypocrisy is not much of a surprise. These same people refused to say boo when many of the other clauses of the constitution were trampled with the Patriot Act and by Bush’s Presidential degrees e.g.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
~ Fourth Amendment

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
~ Fifth Amendment

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.
~ Sixth Amendment

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
~ Eighth Amendment

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
~ Ninth Amendment

Links

reader feedback on this essay.

standard footer
	This page is posted on the web at:	http://mindprod.com/politics/guncontrol.html
	Optional Replicator mirror of mindprod.com on local hard disk J:	J:\mindprod\politics\guncontrol.html
	Please read the feedback from other visitors, or send your own feedback about the site. Contact Roedy. Please feel free to link to this page without explicit permission.
	Canadian Mind Products IP:[65.110.21.43] Your face IP:[3.144.86.138]
Feedback	You are visitor number