Common Sense

“Kentucky: Boy, 5, Kills Sister, 2”

This headline yesterday was a small note in the chain of
US gun deaths, of which there have been nearly 4,000
since the gun devastation at Newtown, Connecticut last
December. Close to matching the number of deaths we
incur secondary to motor vehicle accidents. The existence
of guns and motor vehicles seem to present some equivalent
societal issues. They are both capable of a similar potential
solution.

Since the widespread introduction, use and availability of
motor vehicles every state registers all of these vehicles. Every state
tests and licenses all drivers and to require that all the users
obtain liability insurance to cover any harm or damage
related to the use, misuse, or abuse of these devices. Why
not? No harm, no foul.

Guns are of commensurate or greater concern to our
society for many intrinsic and extrinsic particulars, but
it would seem logical to begin to approach guns with the
same wisdom and practicality society has applied to its
relationship with motor vehicles. This not withstanding
all the emotions that are attached to the subject of “gun
control.”

Like motor vehicles, guns may be misused and guns like
motor vehicles can be abused and like motor vehicles guns may be harmful to their owners,their users or to innocent bystanders. Both are obviously incompatible with alcohol, mind altering drugs and certain illnesses.

Therefore, like motor vehicles, guns can be registered. The purchasers of guns should be identified and their backgrounds checked and all should be trained and licensed users. The users of guns should be educated to defined standards and be tested and licensed prior to permitted use and regularly thereafter. Gun owners, like motor vehicle
owners, should be required to obtain liability insurance to
cover the loss of life, injury, or damages inflicted on others
by gun use.

These simple ideas, which are widely applied and accepted for motor vehicles in our society, may give us a pathway to the reduction of
the harm to all of us under present conditions. None of
this would in anyway conflict with the Second Amendment
rights of individuals (a well regulated militia being necessary
to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep
and bear arms shall not be infringed.)