What I Think About Gun Control

This past Tuesday, I wrote a post inviting my readers to convince me to the validity of their viewpoints about gun control. Here was the top comment, written by CougarMan.

We need common-sense regulations. I support the Bill of Rights and it's vitally important that we never allow government to disarm its people. That said, we need a cooling-off period before a new gun can be acquired. Prospective gun owners should be subjected to a background check that includes a scan for certain mental-illness factors. And why not require firearms education? Any gun owner must be required to secure their guns. And, there should be legal penalties for any owner whose unsecured gun is used in a crime, or used by a child without proper training.

I thought CougarMan had come excellent points. Before I address them directly, I'm going to talk about my personal views on gun control.

Beliefs on gun control seem to fall somewhere in between two extremes. 

1.) Guns should be illegal. 

2.) Everyone should have guns. 

There have been two instances in my life when I have seen the consequences of both extremes. I will begin with the first extreme.

Guns should be Illegal

As most long-time readers know, I spent the two years immediately prior to the establishment of this blog serving a full-time mission for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. 20 of those months were spent in Jamaica, a country which has strict anti-gun laws. Shoot, even water guns are illegal.

Despite this, many of my fellow missionaries told stories of men and women being gunned down right in front of them. Shoot, I saw a shootout erupt some fifty yards ahead of me. People were terrified. They ran screaming, covering their heads and diving for cover. My companion and I ran for cover ourselves.

In Jamaica, I saw that gun laws didn't work. Criminals found ways to smuggle guns into the country, and now the common citizen was less prepared to defend themselves. Shoot, the anti-gun laws put innocent, law-abiding people at a disadvantage.

Everyone should have Guns

You may laugh at this example, but it's stuck with me. I will now relate an experience I had while playing a version of the hit video game series Fallout.

Modern versions of Fallout are real time first-person video games set in a post-apocalyptic future where the bombs dropped, the world mutated, and everyone turned to extreme measures to stay alive. Some of those extreme measures included packing heat. At all times.

When I first started playing Fallout, I decided I wanted to be a bad guy. When I strolled into my first town, I decided to cement my reputation as a hard-boiled ruffian by gunning down the sheriff. In broad daylight. In front of about twenty witnesses. Aw, yeah, I thought to myself. Now everyone will fear me!

Every single witness drew their weapons.

"Uh," I said. "Wait, hold on."

I died in about two seconds, the full brunt of the town's artillery riddling me to oblivion.

I respawned and decided to play a much nicer character. A saint, even.

Picking Between the Two Extremes

Based on my experiences, I think that, if everyone packed heat, inherently violent people would be deterred from using them. After all, one misfire, and the whole world explodes around them.

But is that the best way?

Shoot, you know I don't believe in extremism. So let's summarize what I do believe.

First, I believe in the 2nd Amendment. What's more, it's a law. I think everyone should have the right to defend themselves in whatever capacity they feel fit, and nobody should try to take that right away from them.

Of course, as we know from recent shootings, most shooters expect to die at the end of their rampage. Shoot, they long for that release. They don't care if a bunch of gun-toting cops take them down, they want to make a statement.

Even in a world like my video game, I still killed the sheriff. I may not have killed the deputy, but an innocent man (well, an innocent collection of semi-intelligent pixels) died. Everyone may have had guns in that trigger-happy town, but they were too late to stop me from murdering someone.

So not everyone should be allowed to have guns. That's why certain regulations do need to exist. I don't currently own any guns, but I shouldn't be allowed to just walk into a store, buy some boom sticks, and walk out. No, I should be tested to see if I've had proper gun handling training. I should be tested for any psychological deficiencies. What's more, you should have to take one of those tests every time you renew your gun license. That way, crazies like me don't walk into random towns and kill the sheriff!

... I mean, crazies like my video game character. Not me. Obviously. Ha ha.

What About the Comments?

CougarMan also mentioned cool-down periods and legal action against anyone who demonstrates extreme negligence regarding gun safety. I think those are great ideas. If you wanna buy a new gun, you have to wait three weeks before you pick it up. That way, if you wanted to buy a gun to lash out at somebody, you've probably had time to work things out in the meantime. Also, if your kid kills himself because you left your gun on the sofa, you should definitely face legal action. Thanks, CougarMan!

In Summary

The right to bear arms is really the right to defend oneself, and everyone should have that right. However, if someone does not prove themselves capable of gun ownership, including through gun handling and safety training and psychological testing, then they should not be given guns.

If someone tries to take my right to defend myself away from me, then I will not be able to support that person.

Well, that's it! I'll see you guys tomorrow for the Snapshot, and then on Monday for more good stuff!