Responsible Gun Control

Here is the scoop. Last night I was involved in a debate over gun regulations and gun control measures that should be implemented in the change of our culture and society. The conversation was supposed to be me towing the middle line on this issue because I understand the need for serious gun reform of our draconian laws. However, the Liberal left and the Conservative Right need to come to an agreement that neither side is going to get everything they want and neither side can continue to ignore the issue. The idea on the Conservative Right that any new regulation is an infringement on 2nd Amendment Rights is absurd. On the Liberal side, people who believe that we can prevent everything negative from happening is also absurd. So we need to find a comfortable middle ground that balances meaningful regulation that does not hinder (too much) the ability to acquire.

So lets jump in shall we? My colleague brought up the opinion that drinking and driving kills people, so should we take away people’s rights to drive? No, that is an absurd comparison in its own right, but actually it created my first point on this issue. When we learn how to drive cars and in order to get our drivers license, we go through driver’s education and that education is mandated by the state in which you reside. We don’t just give licenses to people who have not demonstrated that they are educated, understand the basic concepts of driving, and pass some kind of proficiency exam (aka the dreaded driver’s exam). I cannot speak for every state, but at least in Iowa I feel that it is a crazy notion that we are going to give someone the ability to acquire handguns, shotguns, etc. without having them demonstrate at least the basics of gun ownership. Would we want someone applying for a driver’s license to just attend a lecture on driving and then get their license? No.

This also brings up another point on the standard of education. I was informed that the DNR offers a course that satisfies the gun permit requirement in Iowa. That’s all fine and dandy and I am sure that the standards are pretty high there, but how do you explain all the online form of classes that are also offered? There is probably some serious quality control issues if you can log onto a course online, read some stuff, pass a quiz, and receive a gun permit. I am not saying that it needs to be a week long course on gun training, but I think there should be two main components to education on guns. The lecture and then the shooting proficiency. The shooting proficiency exam doesn’t need to be hitting a 12 inch target at 100 yards, but you should at least be able to hit a 3 foot target at 30 yards minimum. The reason I think that there should be a shooting proficiency requirement, because even if you are just acquiring a gun (I feel it would be foolish to think that you aren’t at least once you are going to shoot it) you should probably get some practice with it.

Background Checks- Why in the world are they arguing against background checks? Back to the driver’s license example, we have a system in place that if you commit an offense in another state that makes you lose your license, you cannot obtain a license in another state. Makes sense right? I feel there needs to be a national database that communicates in other states whether or not you meet the requirements of your home state to acquire a gun. We also need to put in place a system for mental health professionals to block the access to a weapon if the person is deemed dangerous to themselves or others. Some people say that violates HIPAA, but a reason does not need to be listed and if you are denied you should be able to go to a government (state or federal) and find out why, and if you want appeal the judgment that is your right and there should be a process for that as well. Too many times have we seen people get killed because they are mentally unstable and their therapists or psychiatrists was caught between HIPAA and morals and decided to uphold their oath of confidentiality.

There also needs to be a push at the national level to standardize our requirements to obtain a gun. If all states had the same requirements, it would eliminate questions about what is required and would protect against those individuals who go to another state and acquire a gun because of their relaxed gun laws.

Lastly, because she brought up this point, most guns that are used in murders, mass killings, etc. are not purchased on the black market, contrary to what the NRA would have you believe. Statistics have proven that most people who are involved in these crimes acquired the weapon legally and through channels that have relaxed regulations. This highlights the reason why we need to standardize these regulations between states and provide warning systems.

These are all common sense regulations that do not put too much burden on somebody who is trying to acquire a weapon. Just like cars shouldn’t we expect some kind of proficiency? No system is perfect, but what we currently have is not working. We need to bring new ideas into the mix and if they don’t work then we can try something else, but no action is as bad as ignoring the issues.