Gun Control vs. Gun Rights
Some of you may remember the post I made a while back regarding the Virginia Tech Shootings. A few of my friends have actually commented on this post on other forums, and one of them, Harsan Ronyo, replied on his own blog. Harson’s focus in the wake of this tragedy is on people that he says pollute the memory of the victims by using the Virginia Tech shootings to justify additional gun control.
Given that there is all this discussion going on about gun control, a subject I feel is an important one, I feel I should weigh in on the subject. While the discussion of gun control these days has been tied inextricably to the latest of the School Shootings. I shall try to be respectful to the diseased and their families, but with school shootings being a rallying point for both sides, I will make mention of them occasionally.
What I will not pull punches on are stupid, deranged murderers, or people that condone them. People who commit suicide are cowards, and those that shoot others, then themselves are worse than cowards, they are deranged murderers who either kill because they don’t want to go alone, or because they want publicity in death that they could not achieve in light. Giving any sympathy or attention to a given coward like that will only encourage them. Anyone seeking attention that way deserves to be buried in an un-marked grave, if at all, and have all record of their name expunged.
Why Most Democrats Won’t Push for More Gun Control Laws
So far there has been little push by the Democrats in the United States Senate and House of Representatives to pass bills regarding gun control. Even Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is warning against “a rush to judgment” as he puts it. There are several good reasons for this in the realm of politics.
The Democrats hold only a slight lead over the Republicans in the House of Representatives and the Senate, and as most Republicans traditionally are against gun control, it’s unlikely that they will be able to rally enough support for any gun control bill that they will be able to overcome a presidential Veto. If the Democrats do intend to introduce any such legislation, they’re likely biding their time until after the next election, when they hope they will have a more sympathetic President in office.
Also, many Democratic candidates have realized that they can only carry the day in more conservative states if they do not support gun control. Part of the reason that the Democrats are carrying any sort of majority is that they were able to win seats in traditionally conservative states, and part of why they won was by presenting themselves as gun rights advocates.
If that weren’t enough to indicate that more restrictive gun control laws aren’t on the way, many Democrats of the legislature, some of them in leadership positions are gun owners themselves.
Gun Control Advocates
One of the groups is the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. The President of the Brady campaign, Paul Helmke believes that more gun control is inevitable, and says that increasing the number of guns in a community increases the number of gun deaths and the amount of gun violence in the community (source). He says that the various gun control measures he recommends are “common sense”.
According to their page, the rate of suicide among women is higher in states with higher concentrations of guns. They also say that because so few rapes are perpetrated using guns, women would be better off taking self-defense classes than using guns. Further, they specifically state that “Additionally, it is estimated that 1 to 3 million guns change hands in the secondary market each year, and many of these sales are not regulated.” Another group is Americans for Gun Safety. They propose what they believe to be a “moderate, sensible approach to guns.” This includes improving background checks, and requiring background checks to occur any time a gun is sold, including at gun shows.
There is also a recent upwelling of support for gun control among the general populous. Most of the people I have talked to in this camp are ones I discussed it with online. Comments in this camp range from saying that the Second Amendment is “An anachronistic law”, to saying that if everyone had a gun, every fist fight we have now would become a gun fight instead. Others have specifically said that there will never be any reason for any people in a modern, civilized country to overthrow their government. Some have even said that there is no reason for one to own a gun. Someone has even said that the reason we haven’t banned guns completely is that we are more concerned with protecting our right to carry guns than our children’s right to life. This last person is someone that also endorsed cutting off the genitalia of anyone convicted of a sexual offense.
In addition, there are criminals out there who are fans of gun control laws, as it actually reduces the likely hood that they will choose a victim who is armed, especially in places where those that do carry guns must carry them openly.
Gun Rights Advocates
To start us off, the entertainers Penn & Teller are firm gun control advocates. The reason that I am starting with these two is to connect some evidence with my above statement about criminals liking gun control. In an Anti Gun Control episode of their television show, the two actually provide a criminal who was willing to talk about why he is in favor of gun control. They discuss this fact as a part of their reasons to protect gun rights. I’ve provided these videos below.
There is also the National Rifle Association (NRA). According to the NRA, they do not oppose reasonable gun laws. They have supported the ban on Armor piercing ammunition. They also supported a law that prevents the manufacture of guns able to pass through airport detectors, and also provides for more advanced detection equipment in airports. They also support laws which make it illegal for convicted criminals to own handguns, and which require computerized background checks at the time of purchase.
What the NRA does oppose is forcing prospective gun owners to have an artificial waiting period imposed by law when the background check can be completed quickly and efficiently at the time of purchase. In some states, you can actually have your background check done ahead of time and get a “license to purchase.” The NRA also contends that since the registration and ban of hand guns the rate of both general crime and violent crime in England has actually increased.
Another group fighting for gun rights is the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF). SAF states that according to the United States Code (Section 10 USC 311), the militia consists of “All able-bodied males at least 17 years of age…and under 45 years of age who are or have made a declaration to become a citizen of the United States.” and that the reserve militia consists of women, children, and the elderly as well.
The SAF contends that the Brady Bill requiring handgun checks costs $24 per check, and that in the first year it was instituted, over 2 million checks were made, but only 4 prosecutions resulted, and police officers were pulled from active duty to desk jobs in order to perform those background checks.
The SAF contends that in Brittain the mugging rates are 40% higher than in the United States, and that the Burglary rate is double that of the United States. And according to their site Weapons were outlawed in Australia following a publicized shooting and that “Immediately after the ban, armed robberies rose by 73 percent, unarmed robberies by 28 percent, kidnappings by 38 percent, assaults by 17 percent, and manslaughter by 29 percent.”
Who Owns and Uses Guns
Yes, criminals often do own and use firearms, but there are also several classes of people who have reason to own and employ the use of firearms for legal and protected uses.
- Members of the Armed Forces
- Police Officers
- Ranchers and farmers who own livestock, and seek to protect their families and livestock from predators.
- Anyone who routinely works in an area populated by dangerous wildlife.
- Hunters who hunt for sport, to reduce the cost of feeding their families, or to keep the populations of certain animals down, in order to keep the animal population healthy in the absence of predators shot in the defense of life and livelihood.
- Those who seek to protect themselves from robbers and assailants.
- Target shooters who practice marksmanship for sport.
- Those who believe that some day the government may get so out of hand that the only way to regain our civil liberties would be through armed revolt.
- Anyone who thinks that they may one day join the military (or be forced to through the draft) and wishes to get a leg up on their training.
Reasons for Gun Control
The majority of people who advocate gun control do so because they care. Most of them believe that by making guns harder to get legally, or that banning them entirely, except for the police and armed forces (and in some cases retired police officers and veterans) will reduce the amount of gun violence. Most of them believe that if we can reduce a type of violence, it will reduce violence as a whole.
Many of these people believe that members of the public as a whole have no need to own a gun. Many of them believe that the average American isn’t responsible enough to own a gun either.
Reasons for Gun Rights
There are actual legitimate uses for guns such as hunting for food, protecting one’s self from wild animals, and protecting one’s self from violent criminals (who some might argue fall in the previous category as well). For someone to responsibly own a gun they must get training in it’s use, care, and prop\per storage. This training can be imparted by classes, or it can be imparted simply by being around responsible gun owners who insist on a sense of respect towards the danger that a gun can pose if not handled properly, like most hunters. Some people can even learn this responsibility by doing research followed by careful experimentation. But if someone wishes to purchase a gun, and is willing to get the training to allow them to be a responsible gun owner, however they get it, I don’t see why this would be dis-allowed.
One of the big problems with making firearms harder to get is that it makes it harder for legitimate gun owners to get their hands on these guns, whereas criminals are still likely to break the laws to get their hands on them. Another flaw in the idea of gun control is that ‘gun violence’ isn’t really a type of violence separate from other kinds. Gun violence is any act of violence, across a wide range of other types of violence (murder, rape, suicide, armed robbery, and even self-defense) where the tool used for that violence is a gun. If you remove the tool, you don’t remove the motivations for these acts. Murderers still want to kill people. Rapists are still sickos. Armed robbers want to deprive people of their property, and people will always want to defend themselves from these acts.
Even if we do it successfully, removing guns from the equation just means that we will go back to brute force, so that we’ll have thugs robbing people who are obviously physically weaker than the thugs are.
Another problem with the logic behind the positions advocating gun control is that many of them assume that the public should rely on the police to protect them. First of all, in many cases the police are to far away to arrive before the violence has already occurred. For another, there are cases when the police simply do not believe that you need help even if you call for it. Third, while many police officers do see it as their duty “to serve and protect” the public, courts have ruled that the government has no duty to protect any individual.
School Shootings
While it is true that school shootings could not happen if guns did not exist, they do exist. One big reason for shootings and other violent crimes are an imbalance in what type of weapon criminals and law abiding citizens are able to acquire. In areas where those that illegally own guns enjoy an audience of victims without guns, they have little to fear from their victims.
A while ago I was watching a policeman who was a guest on CNN analyze why school shootings are so devastating. He said that it was because mass shooters prefer ’soft targets’, where resistance to their rampage is likely to be the smallest, and they can kill the largest number of people. One reason that schools are such soft targets is the prohibition on carrying legally owned guns. A prohibition against legal gun ownership on campus was not created at Virginia Tech until at least 2005 (source), yet when the VTech shooting occurred, the prohibition was in place.
There are cases of attempted mass shootings stopped by armed students on campus.
One of these is the shooting at Appalachian School of Law, where two armed students, and one unarmed student stopped the shooting from becoming worse. (Additional Source 1, Additional Source 2).
There was also a shooting in Pearl, Mississippi, at Pearl High School.The Assistant Principal Joel Myrick saw the shooter get into his vehicle, and held him at gun point until the police arrived. The shooter’s plan was to continue his rampage at a nearby middle school.