Yesterday Nick wrote about three topics: assisted suicide, gay marriage and gun control. I wholeheartedly support assisted suicide for the terminally ill and for those in the early stages of Alzheimer’s who wish to leave their lives in dignity. I believe that gay couples should have exactly the same rights as heterosexual couples. But I can’t view gun control in black and white like I can assisted suicide and gay marriage. For that reason, I have elected to write about my experiences with guns over the course of my life. Then perhaps you will understand why I can’t formulate a specific answer to the question of gun control.
My mother owns two guns: a shotgun and a revolver. I’m not sure if she’s even fired either of them; I know for certain that she has never been in a position where she felt she had to use them. However, my mom lives alone, and having these guns makes her feel safe.
I was home this summer when my mom got the revolver. She wanted me to keep it in my house for protection, but I declined. Aside from the fact that I cannot hit a damn thing outside of point-blank range, when it came down to it, I personally didn’t want to have to deal with the risks and responsibilities of having a gun in my house. And if someone really did break in, could I actually shoot them? I don’t know. I don’t really want to find out.
While I was home this summer, I had to call 911 because the people living in the house next door were having an argument with someone. I called 911 at the point when that someone showed up with a gun and was standing on my neighbors’ front porch, screaming and waving said gun around.
An ex-boyfriend of mine pointed a gun (his father’s .45) at me on two different occasions, way back in the day. (If you know my dating history, I bet you won’t have any trouble guessing which ex this was! What *was* I thinking?)
A friend of mine is a gun buff. He has numerous weapons, ranging from handguns to rifles to an AK-47. Guns are one of his hobbies. He’s not using these weapons to kill people or to commit criminal acts. He is not a member of any sort of militia. This fellow is married; he has a great job and a large family. Not to worry, he keeps the guns locked away when he is not using them. I have gone shooting with him, and have personally witnessed how careful he is when it comes to safety.
Four years ago I worked for the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (used to be called Florida Game and Fish) during hunting season. At the time I was otherwise unemployed and very much in need of a job. My job was to record data pertaining to all kills made by hunters in the Osceola National Forest during the 2002-2003 hunting season. This meant weighing and measuring dead deer (and the occasional wild hog) recording information on the hunter and the location of the kill, and cutting the jawbone out of the deer. I worked in ten hour shifts, and on most days not one single deer was brought in. I chalked that up to the fact that so many of the hunters who stopped in to chat on their way in or out of the forest were inebriated. Obviously the fact that hunting while intoxicated did little to stop the good ol’ boys of north-central Florida from doing that very thing.
My mother owns two guns: a shotgun and a revolver. I’m not sure if she’s even fired either of them; I know for certain that she has never been in a position where she felt she had to use them. However, my mom lives alone, and having these guns makes her feel safe.
I was home this summer when my mom got the revolver. She wanted me to keep it in my house for protection, but I declined. Aside from the fact that I cannot hit a damn thing outside of point-blank range, when it came down to it, I personally didn’t want to have to deal with the risks and responsibilities of having a gun in my house. And if someone really did break in, could I actually shoot them? I don’t know. I don’t really want to find out.
While I was home this summer, I had to call 911 because the people living in the house next door were having an argument with someone. I called 911 at the point when that someone showed up with a gun and was standing on my neighbors’ front porch, screaming and waving said gun around.
An ex-boyfriend of mine pointed a gun (his father’s .45) at me on two different occasions, way back in the day. (If you know my dating history, I bet you won’t have any trouble guessing which ex this was! What *was* I thinking?)
A friend of mine is a gun buff. He has numerous weapons, ranging from handguns to rifles to an AK-47. Guns are one of his hobbies. He’s not using these weapons to kill people or to commit criminal acts. He is not a member of any sort of militia. This fellow is married; he has a great job and a large family. Not to worry, he keeps the guns locked away when he is not using them. I have gone shooting with him, and have personally witnessed how careful he is when it comes to safety.
Four years ago I worked for the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (used to be called Florida Game and Fish) during hunting season. At the time I was otherwise unemployed and very much in need of a job. My job was to record data pertaining to all kills made by hunters in the Osceola National Forest during the 2002-2003 hunting season. This meant weighing and measuring dead deer (and the occasional wild hog) recording information on the hunter and the location of the kill, and cutting the jawbone out of the deer. I worked in ten hour shifts, and on most days not one single deer was brought in. I chalked that up to the fact that so many of the hunters who stopped in to chat on their way in or out of the forest were inebriated. Obviously the fact that hunting while intoxicated did little to stop the good ol’ boys of north-central Florida from doing that very thing.
According to wikipedia, the murder rate in the US (including murders not involving handguns) was 5.9 murders per 100,000 people in 2005.
I have spent a LOT of time in Russia. Gun ownership is illegal there. Of course, if you pay attention to the news, you must know that the murder rate in Russia is incredibly high. According to Guns and Ammo magazine:
Guns are effectively outlawed in Russia. Private handgun ownership is totally prohibited. A permit is required to purchase a long gun. All guns are registered with authorities. When transporting a long gun, it must be disassembled. Long guns may only be used for self-defense when the gun owner is on his own property. By the way, Russia's murder rate is a staggering 30.6 [per 100,000 people]. (According to Wikipedia it’s actually 19.8 murders per 100,000 people as of 2000; Guns and Ammo doesn’t cite their source.)
Obviously, outlawing personal ownership of firearms has done little to reduce violence in Russia.
Some of my favorite memories from my most recent trip to Russia are of the days when my friends and I went out into the countryside, barbecued lunch, got rather inebriated and spent hours shooting BB guns at various targets. We did this a LOT. I imagine these guys would have LOVED to have had the opportunity to shoot real guns. I also imagine that they would not have reduced their consumption of alcohol just because their weapons were real.
Back in 2000 I rather accidentally ended up at a mafia-run club in Moscow. My friend and I were allowed entrance (for free even) once the bouncers learned that we were Americans. However, before we could enter we were felt-up (er, “searched”) by a very burly Russian security guard holding an AK-47. I would prefer to never experience that again!
I currently live in South Korea, another country where private firearm ownership is illegal. According to wikipedia, the murder rate in South Korea for 2004 was 2.18 per 100,000 people.
Here in South Korea, you can buy incredibly realistic toy guns. Back home, toy makers are restricted to producing only toy guns which are obviously toys. This makes sense, as no one wants to be robbed at gunpoint only to later learn they were robbed by a toy fun. And of course, you don’t want to get shot by a cop who thought you were pointing a *real* gun. It definitely gave me a shock the first time I saw one of my first graders holding an incredibly realistic looking handgun, although I’ve certainly since gotten used to the sight of them.
So there you go. The above are the points in time when guns and my life have intersected. As to whether or not there should be restrictions or bans on gun ownership… well, perhaps you can see why I don’t know.
9 comments:
I would never outlaw personal ownership of guns; I have often honestly wanted to purchase a gun myself for protection, and I likely will one day. Growing up in the South, I have been around guns and fired guns. I have some very libertarian family members who own guns and I wholeheartedly support their gun ownership. And besides, the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution, which I hold in extremely high esteem, guarantees personal gun ownership. However, I can't think of any thing that an AK-47, or an Uzi, or any assault weapon really, I can't see what purpose they serve. I think that people need to protect themselves, I think that people should be able to collect guns or hunt (even though I am no fan of hunting), but some gun control, as I said, is warranted, I believe. Our founding fathers, in all of their wisdom, couldn't have expected assault weapons. The only other gun control I'd support is closing the gun show loophole; being the loophole that allows people to bypass the normal waiting period if they go to a gun show and buy a gun. Obviously, if someone can't wait a few days to have their gun in hand, there's something wrong there (and, of course, if someone is bent on killing someone else, there are other ways to kill besides with guns, but we should at least try to make it more difficult to do so, and guns are arguably more dangerous than other weapons). So anyways, I agree with you, Jane; I am all for personal gun ownership. But I don't believe that right is totally absolute, as in any sort of gun.
I'm surprised you didn't take me up on the gay marriage issue; I basically said that while I am for gays getting all of the same rights as any other legally bound couple, I staked out the position that I'm against it being called "marriage" in the traditional sense.
Here's a case in point: on the front page of the South Florida Sun-Sentinel this morning:
Baby killed, 5 others wounded as gunmen with assault rifle open fire in Riviera Beach:
RIVIERA BEACH -- An 8-month-baby boy was shot dead last night while sitting in a baby carrier in a parked car outside a home. Five other people were wounded in the attack, a member of Palm Beach County's Violent Crimes Task Force said on Tuesday.
Why should people be allowed to have assault rifles again? They shouldn't.
This kind of shit would also reinforce my belief that regular people should be allowed to have a reasonable gun for their own protection, but assault rifles should be banned. I don't care if some people "like them" or wish to "collect them." There are lots of things that people would like to have and collect or use that they aren't allowed to have. Why shouldn't assault rifles be illegal and not manufactured outside of the military and law enforcement?
But Nick, what if you change that headline to "Baby killed as angry man drives car into crowd?"
I mean, maybe I agree about assault rifles, but I'm just playing devil's advocate.
Well, I agree; obviously we aren't going to outlaw cars, and cars are dangerous and are used as weapons in some rare cases. I could kill someone with a pencil, and on and on. But that's not a good argument as to why we shouldn't outlaw certain weapons; a car is used 99.999999% of the time for good purposes (transportation), a knife or pencil and whatever; what good is an assault rifle? There's really no good argument as to why they shouldn't be outlawed. If we are going to say, well, other things could be used, so let's look at all of the things that are illegal, and let's legalize all of it, no matter how dangerous.
Plus, Glenn, your using a car as an example is somewhat silly; you can see a car coming and should have an easier time to get out of the way of one, in this situation. A gun can be concealed. There's not too many cars being driven into crowds and places; at least here in SoFla, there's a new shooting (probably most of the time, of children and teenagers) every week, if not multiple times a week sometimes.
Nick, if you look at the so called assault weapons statistics you would see that more people die in car accidents than are killed by people with assault weapons.
Looking at the broader picture of all gun use in crime, it becomes clear that "assault weapons" are a minor part of the problem. Police gun seizure data from around the nation finds that "assault weapons" account for less than 2% of guns seized by the police; more typically, they account for less than 1%, according to data compiled from 24 major jurisdictions.
At first blush one might say that the lack of crime using assault weapons or high-capacity magazines is due to the ban. Wrong. Before the ban the AK and AR type rifles, two of the most common, were produced in the millions. These weapons were grandfathered in as per the provisions of the bill. Further, standard capacity (30 rounds or more) magazines designed for these weapons were mass-produced and surpluses are in the millions. There is no shortage of these “pre-ban” magazines and in many cases they can be had for little more than their “post-ban” counterparts.
"Assault Weapon" Statistics
California. In 1990, "assault weapons" comprised thirty-six of the 963 firearms involved in homicide or aggravated assault and analyzed by police crime laboratories, according to a report prepared by the California Department of Justice, and based on data from police firearms laboratories throughout the state. The report concluded that "assault weapons play a very small role in assault and homicide firearm cases." Of the 1,979 guns seized from California narcotics dealers in 1990, fifty-eight were "assault weapons."
Chicago. From 1985 through 1989, only one homicide was perpetrated with a military caliber rifle. Of the 17,144 guns seized by the Chicago police in 1989, 175 were "military style weapons."
Florida. Florida Department of Law Enforcement Uniform Crime Reports for 1989 indicate that rifles of all types accounted for 2.6% of the weapons used in Florida homicides. The Florida Assault Weapons Commission found that "assault weapons" were used in 17 of 7,500 gun crimes for the years 1986-1989.
Los Angeles. Of the more than 4,000 guns seized by police during one year, only about 3% were "assault weapons."
Maryland. In 1989-90, there was only one death involving a "semiautomatic assault rifle" in all twenty-four counties of the State of Maryland.
Massachusetts. Of 161 fatal shootings in Massachusetts in 1988, three involved "semiautomatic assault rifles." From 1985 to 1991, the guns were involved in 0.7% of all shootings.
Miami. The Miami police seized 18,702 firearms from January 1, 1989 to December 31, 1993. Of these, 3.13% were "assault weapons."
New Jersey. According to the Deputy Chief Joseph Constance of the Trenton New Jersey Police Department, in 1989, there was not a single murder involving any rifle, much less a "semiautomatic assault rifle," in the State of New Jersey. No person in New Jersey was killed with an "assault weapon" in 1988. Nevertheless, in 1990 the New Jersey legislature enacted an "assault weapon" ban that included low-power .22 rifles, and even BB guns. Based on the legislature's broad definition of "assault weapons," in 1991, such guns were used in five of 410 murders in New Jersey; in forty-seven of 22,728 armed robberies; and in twenty-three of 23,720 aggravated assaults committed in New Jersey.
New York City. Of 12,138 crime guns seized by New York City police in 1988, eighty were "assault-type" firearms.
New York State. Semiautomatic "assault rifles" were used in twenty of the 2,394 murders in New York State in 1992.
San Diego. Of the 3,000 firearms seized by the San Diego police in 1988-90, nine were "assault weapons" under the California definition.
San Francisco. Only 2.2% of the firearms confiscated in 1988 were military-style semiautomatics.
Virginia. Of the 1,171 weapons analyzed in state forensics laboratories in 1992, 3.3% were "assault weapons."
National statistics. Less than four percent of all homicides in the United States involve any type of rifle. No more than .8% of homicides are perpetrated with rifles using military calibers. (And not all rifles using such calibers are usually considered "assault weapons.") Overall, the number of persons killed with rifles of any type in 1990 was lower than the number in any year in the 1980s.
Also after the assault weapons ban expired the long awaited media fueled frenzy of wild west shootouts with assault weapons predictably never took place, much to the suprise of leftist gun grabbers everywhere.
And you can't really conceal an AK-47 very well, can you? I mean, it's not like you can just hide it in your jacket until you need it. It's a pretty hefty weapon.
I don't want to say everything I have to say before it's my day, so I'll cut this short. But Thursday, I've got some things. Just you wait!
Ah, leftist gun grabbers. I suppose some would say that everyone should be packing heat; because crossfire is exactly what would be best in any situation.
I don't argue that gun ownership should be taken away; but, guns should be a little harder to get, and assault weapons should be impossible to get. The argument that there are more car deaths than gun deaths is asinine; cars serve a useful purpose, but what useful purpose, outside of the military and law enforcement, do many of these guns serve? None. Zip. Nada. And no one ever said anything about a "wild west shootout." That's straw man crap. But if anyone thinks that guns should be legal, because other things (such as cars) cause more deaths, then you must be for legalizing everything. Let's go down the list of things that are illegal and legalize it all. Righties should be for gay marriage; after all, that's an infringement, just as some would say restricting some gun ownership is. How about drugs? You must be for legalizing all illegal drugs, right? I'd bet money that's not the case. But don't car deaths equal more than drug deaths?
Glenn, it's not only about an AK-47; any of these weapons make the point. If you're hunting with something like that, you're a psychopath. And if you own something like that in your house for protection, at least in the USA, again, you're a paranoid psychopath. And just because someone thinks those kinds of guns are "cool" does not mean they should have them; by that logic, you must want to legalize everything that someone might want to have, right?
Gunmen with assault rifle shoot 2 men in Lantana drive-by shooting
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/southflorida/sfl-13lantanashooting,0,3610779.story?coll=sfla-home-headlines
Every single day; obviously this could have been a drive-by using a handgun or rifle, but I don't think anyone could rationally argue that one of those guns would be more effective in killing than the mentioned assault rifle; and if we say that a legal handgun or a hunting rifle could kill anyway, by that logic we'd just legalize everything, since there's other stuff that's legal that could be just as harmful. But what do I know, I'm just a Leftist Gun-Grabber!
I grew up in the south, I've been hunting and to the shooting range, and though I don't own a gun, I often think about getting one if I could afford it. I'm obviously not for outlawing guns. But I think that guns that serve no useful purpose except for large-scale and effective massacre should be outlawed, and I think it should be harder and require more background information to purchase legal guns. That certainly doesn't make me a "leftist gun grabber."
Post a Comment