The Tragedy of Guns

The latest in the tragedy of guns is the killing of four Oakland California policemen two days ago. After a routine traffic stop, the assailant shot and killed the two police officers and then two SWAT officers later using an assault rifle and a semi-automatic hand gun.

The assailant was a parolee who had missed several appointments with his parole officer. Some in California are viewing this as an outcome of a much larger problem in California of monitoring parole offenders.

However, I see it more as another tragedy of our liberal gun laws, the blame for which can be placed squarely at the door of the NRA and their rabid push for no restrictions of any kind on guns.

The NRA apparently believes that everyone has the right to own as many guns of any kind as they want and that this right is granted in the Constitution. And unfortunately, emboldened by a string of Supreme Court decisions, the NRA and its supporters have embarked on a journey to overturn more local and state gun control laws.

But some of the NRAs arguments are based on twisted logic. For example, the NRA says that "Guns don't kill people, people do." That's right. People kill people WITH GUNS! No one walks into a mall and kills scores of people with a baseball bat. The NRA will also say that if guns are criminalized, then only criminals will have guns. It is true that even if all guns were outlawed one could still get a gun. But the point of meaningful gun control is to make it much more difficult.

The NRA's main argument has always been that it is our right under the constitution to own guns. But at the time the 2nd amendment was ratified (in 1791) the "well regulated militia" it refers to was composed of ordinary citizens, so the authors wrote that the "right of the people . . ." was not to be infringed, the people being the militia. But today our militia is a formal standing army, so this amendment obviously needs to be interpreted in that context and not, as the gun enthusiasts believe, to allow everyone to own as many guns as possible.

Psychologist Leonard Berkowitz once stated that not only does the finger pull the trigger, but the trigger pulls the finger, implying that the presence of a gun makes its use much more likely. Road rage shootings are a perfect example. If you have a gun within arm's reach in a car when another driver offends you, you are much more likely to use that gun. Again, people kill people, but they are more likely to do so with guns.

Since it's pretty clear that human behavior isn't going to change anytime soon, our only hope to reduce the carnage caused by people with guns, is to pass stronger laws regulating guns and enforce them strictly.

I keep wondering when all the mothers of the victims of gun violence will form a Mothers Against Guns just as mothers did years ago to fight drunk driving. I also wonder how many people need to die tragically and senselessly before our legislature(s) will stand up to the gun lobby and enact real gun control or, better yet, ban the sale of any guns except those used for legal hunting, and hold parents responsible if their children use the parent's gun to kill someone.

Most law enforcement officers are in favor of stricter gun laws which is understandable as the tragedy in Oakland demonstrated all too clearly. Why, then, do legislators support the NRA instead of those who lay their lives on the line for us everyday?

The bottom line is that if we don't do something soon, we will continue to witness mass murder with guns in our streets, schools, city council chambers, hospitals, and homes. Are we okay with that?