Private Gun Ownership - Good or Bad?

[peacetraveler22]

Last week, we had another mass shooting in America. A young college student deeply rooted in misogynist mentality, and frustrated by female rejection, decided to take a drive through a California college town and open fire, killing six people and wounding numerous others. As you know, guns are deeply rooted in American culture, and always have been. So why the recent proliferation of school and mass shootings over the last few years? I think in large part these tragedies are not a result of guns, but the sickness of society in general. After all, Americans have always been armed but the proliferation of mass shootings has been rather recent. Twenty years ago, or even ten, we didn't hear about such tragedies on a consistent basis.

People sometimes forget that the right to bear arms is expressly enumerated in the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Private gun ownership is a principle upon which my country was founded. We are the most heavily armed civilian population in the world, with close to 300 million firearms in the hands of civilians, including my family members. I am completely pro gun, and have always been surrounded by firearms. I shoot Rifles, a 9mm glock and .357 Magnum Revolver at the range under the supervision of my father. So, where is the delicate balance between respecting the Constitutional rights of U.S. citizens and preventing mass shootings?

I can't say there are any easy answers, nor do I know the best solution. For instance, in the most recent shooting, the culprit had a long history of mental illness. Police officers had even visited his house after worried calls from State mental health officials. Yet when they arrived, the shooter was completely calm and convincing. Thus, they had no legal grounds upon which to enter the home and search. If they had entered his room, they would have found his guns, his detailed plans for the massacre which he had been cooking for over a year, and other clear signs that something sinister was brewing.

People all over the globe are suffering from depression and other forms of mental illness, and they should not be under constant suspicion for seeking treatment. One simple way to mitigate widespread gun violence is to have tighter and consistent controls. Currently, gun laws drastically vary from State to State, and I don't claim to be an expert in nationwide legislation. Such knowledge is almost impossible. California is known as the strictest State, and Texas and my home State of Virginia are considered two of the most pro-gun locations in the nation. This is not surprising given that the National Rifle Association is headquartered only a 1/2 hour from my apartment. In Virginia, private citizens can openly carry firearms and I've seen it in restaurants, particularly in rural areas. Is it necessary? I don't think so. Only Washington, DC and Hawaii require all firearms to be registered.

Our founding Fathers made certain that private gun ownership will never completely become extinct in America, but this doesn't mean that laws shouldn't be changed. Some of the most strongly advocated solutions include:

(1) Background checks for all firearm owners
(2) Waiting period
(3) Registration of ALL firearms in every State
(4) For schools - allow teachers to carry firearms into the classroom and train them on use

What do you think? Do you wish Russia had more lenient laws for private gun ownership? What should America do to prevent these tragedies? I sometimes wonder if it's really possible to truly prevent a deranged person from committing these acts of violence. Even if tighter gun controls exist, they would likely still be able to obtain firearms on the black market. In the end, we cannot mandate good and evil, though an attempt should at least be made to control evil to the greatest extent possible.

Comments

[onkel-hans.livejournal.com]

In never had in mind maniacs. Merely, accidents.
But this is a fact, there are no public shooting ranges in Central Virginia. Professionally, I should have said "almost no". In a city I know well there was a single place, on a wrong side of the river. I shot there once. At the face of Saddam Hussein. Having emptied the clip without a second though, I received this second thought and felt very bad. It's not easy to shoot at a human's face, even a bastard's like Saddam. This is another argument against possessing a firearm.

There is a really brilliant report by a Lt. Colonel Dave Grossman, "On Killing". He argues and proves that humans cannot kill. Rather, are not able to. He shows a lot of examples, one, the most impressive for me, is from a battle in the Civil War, I know, I see the place but the name is evading me. In this battle, the two lines of opposition soldiers stood one against the other at a hundred feet. On the command "charge" they charged their rifles. On the command "fire" they made appearance that they had fired. Then again they charged their guns on and on. This is evidenced by the excavations where they found the rifles with more than a dozen charges in each gun. Go get this book, it will really show you more about a human nature.

[peacetraveler22.livejournal.com]

I never shoot at mock human targets, it seems too sadistic in my view. We always use bullseye targets with the red center.