The gun control debate continues on, with a lot of opinions but few real solutions. People who use guns for legal purposes are afraid that their rights to own a gun will be stripped. Others want to protect their families and reduce gun violence. Both sides of the debate have strong motivations and valid reasons for wanting more control and safety.
Neither side has too much to worry about. The House and Senate will make a few changes in gun laws, but their hands are tied by the second amendment. Legal gun owners can rest assured their rights to own a gun are protected.
Reducing gun violence is a three step process:
1) Restricting who can buy guns.
2) Controlling who can access guns.
3) Policing zones where gun violence can occur.
Restricting who can buy guns could work, but it is difficult to know how effective that would be. Criminals have a tendency to buy guns outside of legal channels. However, restricting who can buy guns is a simple, smart way address the problem.
Controlling who can access guns is impossible. Once guns leave the store, they could be given to anyone or sold to anyone through illicit channels. Gun safes can reduce unauthorized access in homes, but the government can’t mandate gun safes for owners. There would be no way to police gun storage without entering into peoples home and violating their right to privacy.
Policing zones to prevent gun violence works, but it is expensive and dangerous to fill the streets with cops. If we put police in public, we could escalate the violence. It is prudent to solve violence with policy instead of police.
Violence is a part of human nature, and unfortunately a fact of life we must accept and attempt to control. Society needs a balance between freedom and control. The process is not flawless, but it is not without merit. Until we become a Utopian society, we must do what we can to protect each other from ourselves and our government.
Comments