My main answer, as I hinted at above, is to not fear guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens. Study after study confirms that where gun ownership is high, crime is low. Where concealed carry is permitted, assault, rape and murder are also low! The data was enough to convince the legislatures of 39 states to enact “shall issue” concealed carry and 48 states overall to have some form of legal CCW. Gun ban groups try to scare people by warning them of the “hidden guns” on the people around them, but they neglect to mention the background checks and training that these people have had, and that they’re an overall benefit to society, providing a deterrent effect that makes everyone safer. But it’s not for everyone.
One original idea that I came up with was born from another faux problem: the so-called “gun show loophole.” Whether they’re well meaning or just posturing, politicians have made a lot of noise about criminals and even terrorists buying guns at gun shows even though there’s scant evidence that this happens. Just attending a gun show once will put those fears to rest. For one thing, all of the licensed dealers at the shows have to treat each transaction as if it was done right from their store, and that means a background check – no exceptions! For this reason, criminals seldom frequent gun shows.
What’s really going on is that many of these politicians are trying to shut down private sales. Imagine, for example, that you have a gun you’d like to sell. You could take it to the show and sell it to a licensed dealer. Before the deal is closed, though, another attendee steps up and offers you more for your gun than the dealer. You’re as free to sell it to him/her in a private transaction at the show as you are to sell it out in the parking lot or in your own home. Such meetings between buyers and sellers happen at many places besides gun shows, such as online forums, classified ads, shooting clubs and bulletin boards. If reducing crime was truly their focus, it seems to me that legislators would cast a wider net! With that idea in mind, my “big idea” is to open up the NICS system to private sellers. Currently only FFLs (Federal Firearms Licensed dealers) can access the system and private citizens are barred due to privacy issues, not to mention that a ton of people accessing the system all at once would cause a collapse! I suggest making it a one-time permit process, which would require the seller to log in their information as well, to safeguard against abuse. This would let sellers know whether or not they’re selling to a prohibited person. It would have one more added benefit: identifying illegal, unlicensed, high-volume dealers. A person who sells a lot of weapons over the course of a year will stand out from someone who sells a gun here and there or even a whole collection. I see it as a total win-win situation.
Speaking of NICS, a few years back, a relative of mine who is not only a wonderful woman, but one who had once dated a police officer, was comfortable around firearms and was even an excellent shot asked me a question. As gun-savvy as she was, she was in favor of the old five-day waiting period, and her question was, “Why the hurry? What possible reason does anyone have to not wait a few days for a gun?” The logic behind the notion of a waiting period was that if, in a fit of anger, one headed off to the local gun shop intent on murder, there would be a “cooling off” period. With no real data or experience to draw from, most people thought that it was an excellent idea. So many did so that, in fact, it was the law until the computerized NICS system was unveiled.
Still, the words of Martin Luther King Jr. kept running through my mind: “A right delayed is a right denied.” Knowing that many of the old prohibitions on guns were, at one time, meant to keep black men and women disarmed and defenseless, I decided to dig a bit deeper into the notion and find out the facts; I needed hard data. Once again the Internet came to my rescue.
According to statistics from the ATF, the average age of a recovered “crime gun” is six years old. This means that people who buy a gun and instantly use it in a crime are a rarity. Even so, that didn’t strike me as a very satisfying answer to that question. Even a seasoned shooter, like my relative, is tempted to say, “It might cause a little inconvenience, but if it saves one life…” With no other supporting rationale, even I’d be tempted to agree!
So I began to consider the idea from the opposite end: could such a law actually put lives in danger? Incredibly, the answer seems to be yes! Soon after the federal waiting period was implemented, reports of women being killed during rancorous divorce proceedings began to arise. In fear of their former spouse and unable to move for one reason or another, they attempted to purchase a firearm and were murdered during the waiting period. What was even more alarming to me was the frequency with which this happened! Most of the time these women had protection orders against their soon-to-be former spouse, but they were nothing more than a piece of paper designed to give a false sense of security. I began to imagine other scenarios where one might be able to see trouble coming and be unable to avoid it, but such instances are less well documented than divorce proceedings. In an effort to make things safer, the waiting period turned out to be one more in a long line of failed safeguards with unintended consequences.
Thankfully the waiting period was replaced by NICS, as I mentioned previously, which is a computerized database of convicted felons and other people who are prohibited by law from legally owning or possessing a firearm. While it won’t stop a determined criminal from getting their hands on a weapon, it will shut them out from legal sources. Even though some extremists on both sides weren’t happy with the idea, it has shown its efficacy over time.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
2
2
