Time for gun control long past
Letter to the Editor
I've been pondering this issue for about a week, but Mike Marchand's article [March 6, The Observer] pushed me over the edge. The subject is gun control, which has become a hot topic once again after a 6 year old girl was shot by her classmate last week in Michigan. The most common defense of guns is that they are just tools, and it is the people who abuse them that are responsible. This is usually true. Criminals and murderers who use guns will often carry out their plan whether or not they use a gun. However, there are far too many accidents like the one in Michigan. Does anybody believe that the first grade boy came to school with murderous intention, focused on destroying his classmate's life by whatever means necessary? Of course not. He was showing off his gun, pointing it as he no doubt learned through TV or video games (though I'm not blaming them), and he pulled the trigger. It was unintentional, yet I believe it is even more tragic than what happened at Columbine (though on a smaller scale). Those boys planned to kill, they knew what they were doing, and they actively committed their crimes. This little boy had no motive, no reasoning to kill. The girl's death happened solely because he had access to a loaded gun. Gun control laws could have stopped this killing, but not the ones at Columbine.
Marchand mentions the areas with strongest gun laws have the highest murder rates. He blames the gun laws, completely ignoring the fact that these areas (L.A., New York, Chicago, Washington, D.C.) are the nation's biggest cities with the largest populations, most gangs, biggest gun circulations, etc. Just imagine how bad the murder rates would be without the laws. Luckily, a Democratic president and increasingly Democratic Congress in recent years have led to a decrease in violent crime, as their anti-gun beliefs have begun to take effect.
Marchand says that the first step is to properly prosecute illegal uses of firearms. Should we prosecute the 6-year-old boy who didn't know he was doing? Should we prosecute the child who gets his dad's gun from his bedroom, drops it, and accidentally shoots his friend? These are not criminals that should be punished. These are accidents stemming from an all too easy availability of guns. They can be easily stopped if the amount of guns in ordinary homes and on the streets is reduced.
Marchand even has the gall to ridicule the "smart gun" proposition, proclaiming this legislation is unnecessary and shouldn't be an option. His alternative is for gun owners to be more responsible. That would be great Mike, but it's not going to happen. There are thousands of people who can't be trusted with children, jobs, their own lives ... yet we should trust them to be responsible with something as dangerous as guns? This would only work in an ideal world, something that's no closer to reality than Oz. Even responsible owners can't stop their kids from breaking into their locked gun cabinet while they're at work and causing some terrible tragedy. Trusting is not enough. Congress needs to take action.
Am I asking for a repeal of the right to bear arms? Of course not. Will more gun control eliminate crime? Not at all. Are some citizens perfectly responsible gun owners? Absolutely. The fact is though, that guns and their availability make it far too easy for tragic accidents and crimes to occur. Just ask that 6-year-old girl. Oh wait, you can't. And you'll never be able to. Because of a criminal? No ... because of a gun.
Ryan S. Davis
Senior, Morrissey Manor
March 7, 2000
All Viewpoint Stories for Thursday, March 9, 2000
