Another terrible killing of two innocent television journalists in Virginia and the opposing cries for gun control and the defense of the Second Amendment has invaded our national conversation again.
There seems to be no middle ground between the two sides. Proponents of gun control believe that guns kill and nothing short of eliminating guns will satisfy their cause. Opponents believe that people kill and the Second Amendment to the Constitution protects their right to bear arms. Most believe that the line is drawn between Republicans and Democrats.
Yet, in 2008 the Bush administration took the position before the Supreme Court that the Second Amendment excludes individual gun owners and only protects the “collective right” of militias. It was a case successfully argued against by Ted Cruz… and the rights of individual gun owners was upheld by a 5-4 margin. In this case, conservatives defeated establishment Republicans…as well as the Liberal establishment.
Conservatives point to the cities like Chicago, New York, Baltimore and others who have the strictest gun laws in the nation…yet continue to have the highest murder rate as well.
Liberals remind us of the many recent tragedies that they believe would not have happened if we had stricter gun laws…at the same time ignoring the obvious in our inner cities.
In the meantime, both sides benefit by lining their respective pockets from affected lobbyists. Rand Paul argues that he doesn’t want the government to have record of his gun ownership. I assume Senator Paul is aware that, in this country, you need a license to kill animals but not to kill its citizens.
If I were President, without infringing on the Second Amendment and the right to own any gun, I would propose a common sense solution that infringes only on the right to maintain and use the gun. Consider:
- People die in automobile accidents regularly. We do not ban cars. In most cases, the car is not at fault. It is the driver.
- However, we have laws regulating the use of an automobile…age, insurance, testing, licensing, etc.
- Why should gun owners not be held to the same/similar standards?
- They should be able to own whatever they wish without controls so long as they are of age (?), pass a background check, demonstrate a proficiency in use and safety, purchase a license and bear responsibility for the use.
- It is important to repeat the requirement to “bear responsibility” for the maintenance and use of that weapon.
- Licensing shall be prohibited for mental health related issues unless clearance provided by a physician. Likewise, anyone who has a criminal background should be eliminated.
I would expand my recommendations:
- The owner of a gun is responsible for its security and use or misuse. If your child has access to your gun and uses it, you should be held as accountable as the perpetrator.
- Criminals who will not bother to obey the laws shall be shown no mercy when in possession of an illegal gun. Five years in prison, minimum, without recourse or extenuating circumstances.
- Police shall have the right to profile the punks, the criminals and the gangs.
Those who do not believe that guns could be banned need only look again at the 5-4 decision in the Supreme Court: and remember that the establishment Republicans joined the Liberal left. Finally, we need leadership in this country that does not fan the flames of division for political gain. We are a nation on edge. It is imperative that we accept a responsibility for our guns.
God Bless America.
Rich Sobieray is a resident of The Villages.
