Gun Problem Solutions Are Elusive
October 7, 2017 at 5:01 a.m.
By Gary [email protected]
I enjoy shooting sports and compete from time to time in the Indiana Multigun series.
I know lots of liberals probably think that makes me a little unhinged. They surmise that no one in their right mind would want to own a gun, much less shoot one.
In their minds, the only purpose a gun has is mayhem. The notion that shooting could actually be a sport or a hobby eludes them. Not all of them, to be sure, but a good number of them.
So when something like Las Vegas happens, it reinforces their worst fears about guns.
I’ve watched a good deal of the news coverage of Las Vegas. It makes me sick, heartbroken, angry and frustrated all at the same time.
The thought of aiming an AR-15 at innocent human beings and launching rounds is so abhorrent to my firearms experience it completely surpasses any level of rational understanding.
The sick, heartbroken and angry comes from the obvious – the indiscriminate, senseless taking of innocent human life.
The frustration comes from the fact that I don’t really see how we solve the problem of gun violence in America.
It’s not like we haven’t been talking about this for decades. The politics of gun violence are well-known and well-versed.
Each time a gun tragedy occurs, there is a hue and cry to do something to “make sure this never happens again.” Lots of Democrats blame the National Rifle Association and the Republicans because these “things” – whatever they are – haven’t been done. In all the rhetoric this week, I literally have not heard a single proposal for a meaningful solution. There’s a reason for that. It’s because there aren’t any meaningful solutions.
What I do hear is things like:
“We need to make a stand for gun control now.”
“We need to say we will not tolerate such incredible loss of life for one day more.”
“It’s time to talk about gun control. It has long been time to talk about gun control.”
Lots of folks in Congress are demanding action. Problem is they’re not saying what action.
Certainly, there are steps can be taken, and steps will be taken. But they’ll nibble around the edges of the problem.
For example, I’m pretty confident “bump stocks” – an accessory that turns a semiautomatic rifle into an almost machinegun – will be banned. The psychopath in Las Vegas equipped his rifles with them and Sen. Diane Feinstein has already introduced a bill to ban them.
They were deemed legal by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in 2010. (Wasn’t Barack Obama president then?)
I’ve known about these things for years. I, and other gun owners, always wondered how the manufacturer ever got them past the BATF.
So sure, ban them. But bump stocks have been used in precisely one shooting now and I’m not sure how many lives would have been saved if the Las Vegas killer didn’t have them.
He had a dozen rifles in the room. He didn’t even have to reload – just pick up another rifle and keep shooting.
I’m all for “expanded” background checks, too. I’ll jump through any hoop the government wants me to. I – and the vast majority of gun owners in this country – have nothing to hide.
Problem is, neither did the Las Vegas killer. So far, at least, it looks as if all his weapons and ammo were legally obtained. He passed all the background checks currently in place and would have passed the expanded checks proposed by Sen. Chris Murphy.
Here’s an idea.
Maybe we could set some standard for the number of guns and rounds of ammunition you can buy at any given time. If you go beyond that, you get flagged and the feds start tracking your activity.
Say, if you buy more 10 guns or 2,500 rounds of ammunition in any given month, you’d be on a list.
But wait. That won’t work.
Anybody bent on destruction would be aware of the restrictions and could easily just delay their plan. They could buy just enough guns and ammo each month to remain under the radar.
We tried banning “assault weapons” for 10 years. But that had virtually no effect on crime or murder rates because those types of weapons were virtually never used to commit crimes and murders in the first place – accounting for less than 1 percent of gun deaths or injuries.
Banning high-capacity magazines had no effect, either, again, because the weapons that use them are rarely used to kill. Besides, it only takes a few seconds to change low-capacity magazines.
The more you look into gun violence, the more frustrating it is to come up with solutions. That’s troubling because the U.S. certainly is awash in guns.
There has been a 71 percent increase in the number of handguns owned and a 38 percent increase in the total number of guns owned in the U.S. since 1994.
We have 4.4 percent of the world’s population and 42 percent of civilian-owned guns. There are more than 300 million guns in the U.S.
But interestingly, since 1993, the national rate of violent crime has decreased almost 50 percent and the nation’s overall gun death rate has declined 31 percent. (Two thirds of those 33,000 annual gun deaths are suicides.)
All this while the population rose from around 260 million to 323 million. Seems counterintuitive, doesn’t it? Lots more people. Lots more guns. Lots less crime and death.
Even so, there’s still a lot of crime and death in America and they don’t really have mass shootings in other industrialized nations.
But is that because of a lack of guns or a lack of desire? I’m pretty sure resourceful individuals could procure a weapon and shoot a bunch of innocent people anywhere on the planet.
But they don’t.
So I often wonder if maybe we should be looking at what motivates somebody to shoot people instead of what he used to shoot them.
Is it a proliferation of mental illness? Are mental health services underfunded? Are antidepressants overprescribed or underprescribed? What about opioids? Is it the glamorization of violence in the entertainment world? Is it the trappings of a capitalist society that generates envy among the haves and have nots?
Is it social media that widens the divisions between us and stokes anger and resentment? Is it the secularization of culture that tells us there is no power higher than the government and removes any fear of final judgment?
Seems to me, if we could mitigate the desire to kill, we wouldn’t have to worry so much about the methods.
[[In-content Ad]]
Latest News
E-Editions
I enjoy shooting sports and compete from time to time in the Indiana Multigun series.
I know lots of liberals probably think that makes me a little unhinged. They surmise that no one in their right mind would want to own a gun, much less shoot one.
In their minds, the only purpose a gun has is mayhem. The notion that shooting could actually be a sport or a hobby eludes them. Not all of them, to be sure, but a good number of them.
So when something like Las Vegas happens, it reinforces their worst fears about guns.
I’ve watched a good deal of the news coverage of Las Vegas. It makes me sick, heartbroken, angry and frustrated all at the same time.
The thought of aiming an AR-15 at innocent human beings and launching rounds is so abhorrent to my firearms experience it completely surpasses any level of rational understanding.
The sick, heartbroken and angry comes from the obvious – the indiscriminate, senseless taking of innocent human life.
The frustration comes from the fact that I don’t really see how we solve the problem of gun violence in America.
It’s not like we haven’t been talking about this for decades. The politics of gun violence are well-known and well-versed.
Each time a gun tragedy occurs, there is a hue and cry to do something to “make sure this never happens again.” Lots of Democrats blame the National Rifle Association and the Republicans because these “things” – whatever they are – haven’t been done. In all the rhetoric this week, I literally have not heard a single proposal for a meaningful solution. There’s a reason for that. It’s because there aren’t any meaningful solutions.
What I do hear is things like:
“We need to make a stand for gun control now.”
“We need to say we will not tolerate such incredible loss of life for one day more.”
“It’s time to talk about gun control. It has long been time to talk about gun control.”
Lots of folks in Congress are demanding action. Problem is they’re not saying what action.
Certainly, there are steps can be taken, and steps will be taken. But they’ll nibble around the edges of the problem.
For example, I’m pretty confident “bump stocks” – an accessory that turns a semiautomatic rifle into an almost machinegun – will be banned. The psychopath in Las Vegas equipped his rifles with them and Sen. Diane Feinstein has already introduced a bill to ban them.
They were deemed legal by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in 2010. (Wasn’t Barack Obama president then?)
I’ve known about these things for years. I, and other gun owners, always wondered how the manufacturer ever got them past the BATF.
So sure, ban them. But bump stocks have been used in precisely one shooting now and I’m not sure how many lives would have been saved if the Las Vegas killer didn’t have them.
He had a dozen rifles in the room. He didn’t even have to reload – just pick up another rifle and keep shooting.
I’m all for “expanded” background checks, too. I’ll jump through any hoop the government wants me to. I – and the vast majority of gun owners in this country – have nothing to hide.
Problem is, neither did the Las Vegas killer. So far, at least, it looks as if all his weapons and ammo were legally obtained. He passed all the background checks currently in place and would have passed the expanded checks proposed by Sen. Chris Murphy.
Here’s an idea.
Maybe we could set some standard for the number of guns and rounds of ammunition you can buy at any given time. If you go beyond that, you get flagged and the feds start tracking your activity.
Say, if you buy more 10 guns or 2,500 rounds of ammunition in any given month, you’d be on a list.
But wait. That won’t work.
Anybody bent on destruction would be aware of the restrictions and could easily just delay their plan. They could buy just enough guns and ammo each month to remain under the radar.
We tried banning “assault weapons” for 10 years. But that had virtually no effect on crime or murder rates because those types of weapons were virtually never used to commit crimes and murders in the first place – accounting for less than 1 percent of gun deaths or injuries.
Banning high-capacity magazines had no effect, either, again, because the weapons that use them are rarely used to kill. Besides, it only takes a few seconds to change low-capacity magazines.
The more you look into gun violence, the more frustrating it is to come up with solutions. That’s troubling because the U.S. certainly is awash in guns.
There has been a 71 percent increase in the number of handguns owned and a 38 percent increase in the total number of guns owned in the U.S. since 1994.
We have 4.4 percent of the world’s population and 42 percent of civilian-owned guns. There are more than 300 million guns in the U.S.
But interestingly, since 1993, the national rate of violent crime has decreased almost 50 percent and the nation’s overall gun death rate has declined 31 percent. (Two thirds of those 33,000 annual gun deaths are suicides.)
All this while the population rose from around 260 million to 323 million. Seems counterintuitive, doesn’t it? Lots more people. Lots more guns. Lots less crime and death.
Even so, there’s still a lot of crime and death in America and they don’t really have mass shootings in other industrialized nations.
But is that because of a lack of guns or a lack of desire? I’m pretty sure resourceful individuals could procure a weapon and shoot a bunch of innocent people anywhere on the planet.
But they don’t.
So I often wonder if maybe we should be looking at what motivates somebody to shoot people instead of what he used to shoot them.
Is it a proliferation of mental illness? Are mental health services underfunded? Are antidepressants overprescribed or underprescribed? What about opioids? Is it the glamorization of violence in the entertainment world? Is it the trappings of a capitalist society that generates envy among the haves and have nots?
Is it social media that widens the divisions between us and stokes anger and resentment? Is it the secularization of culture that tells us there is no power higher than the government and removes any fear of final judgment?
Seems to me, if we could mitigate the desire to kill, we wouldn’t have to worry so much about the methods.
[[In-content Ad]]
Have a news tip? Email [email protected] or Call/Text 360-922-3092