Gun Control

This is always an inflammatory topic, and it has taken the forefront of the national debate (I refuse to say dialog since that would imply a sense of rationality and civilty) given the evil acts against the students and staff of Sandy Hook Elementary in Connecticut.

I spent much of the day trying to sort it out. I will not rehash the arguments of the pro and anti-gun positions. There is already an enormous amount of shouting back and forth between the two sides....... and that's just the arguing  inside my own head. The harsh reality is that both sides are correct. Both sides are also wrong.

First of all, I own guns. Some I bought in my own name, others I purchased from others. Some are merely keepsakes and mementos. Others are kept around for killing. Yes folks, killing. That is what guns are for. Target shooting, hunting, and the like are recreation for many. Even the most shrill of the anti-gun movement would get a kick out of emptying a clip through an AK-47. SO they are fun, but the purpose of guns remains killing.

Let me give you a run-down on my 'recreational' weapons. I've a 30-06, a 30-30, a 10/22, and a 12 ga. shotgun. The first two are designed to hunt large game, especially deer. The 30-06 also has a decent scope on board. Combine that with some 'accelerator' ammo that I may or may not still have and you have a weapon system that is untraceable. I permanently gave up hunting years ago.  I keep the 30-30 because it is fun to shoot. Why then do I keep the 30-06? The 10/22 is waiting for any family member that expresses any interest in taking it. Technically none of these guns are mine. The 30-06 was my father's. The 30-30 came from my brother George.....I think. I didn't buy it. The 10/22 was a gift from either my mom or dad, so who knows who owns that one. That leaves the shotgun. I had a buddy of mine get that for me almost 30 years back. He was about 18 at the time and working for ZCMI. They stopped selling guns, so he bought a bunch of them at a smoking deal.

I also have guns that are not for recreation. That means they are expressly for killing folks. I used to have an 'assault rifle'. I returned it to its previous owner. I have a .40 SW and the aforementioned shotgun for defensive purposes. Assault weapons are, by their nature for offensive use.  I can't rule out using deadly force, but if I do I won't need to take out a dozen people, just one or two tops. The shotgun is much safer to use in home defense because it lacks penetration. Pistols, especially in the dark and against moving targets, require me to be close enough that I am practically touching the bad guys with it.

I like having guns. They are a comfort to me. There have been times I have drawn them in defense. Fortunately both situations defused without me having to shoot. I have since abandoned guns and now use a staff to defend myself in the back-country. Twice this year I was rushed by dogs with their fangs bared.  The last guy didn't even apologize for his dog. I told him I was just going to kick his dog, the staff was for him. I'm thinking of getting a spear tip at the Chinese store in the mall. It will look cool!

Finally I want to make a simple point. The police cannot protect you, at least not immediately. Self-defense is  not only a right but something everyone should commit themselves to learn how to do.

That's the gun nut in me. While I have mellowed somewhat over the years, I am still, deep down, a nasty person under certain circumstances.

What about the anti-gun side of me? I am reminded of a story I heard about my nephew. When he was young he wanted to go 'bunny-camping' with his Dad. He thought the purpose was to find rabbits so he could pet them. I laughed at the time, but I have since come to realize that he was right. I have bunnies that I pet every day. While I do not speak out against hunting, I find the practice personally abhorrent now. In fact, the only reason I didn't bludgeon those dogs I mentioned earlier, was because I don't want to have to someday explain to my nephew why I was mean to a dog. Though I suspect he'd give me a pass on the owners.

Guns don't always impart safety. Don't believe me? Then why don't they allow me to pack heat on a plane? Or a courtroom? Let's assume that I am carrying a pistol and trouble breaks out.  Even if I don't fire a single round, what happens when the cops show up? They don't know who is the bad guy and who isn't. I might get shot! That kind of defeats the whole damn purpose doesn't it. Besides, pistols often miss and sometimes hit innocents. I do sometimes carry a knife. My lifetime batting average on getting the proper target with it is 1.000.  If I am defending my home, then there can be little doubt who the bad guy is. He's the dead guy on the floor. Outside of the home, I feel that firearms simply cannot be justified. My wife still believes otherwise, which means nobody better screw around with me, at least when she's nearby.

People point to Switzerland and correctly assert that every house with a man between 20 and 50 has an assault weapon in it. It's true. Every man (not women incidentally, the Swiss were actually the last European nation that allowed women suffrage) between 20 and 50 has to be in the militia. And guess where they keep their firearm? Locked up at home. The Swiss don't have young thugs gunning each other down in the street. They don't have anybody shooting up schools or shopping malls. Obviously guns aren't the problem. Right?

Partially. The Swiss culture and population are a bit more homogeneous than our own. Like Americans they glorify money, but not violence. There is another crucial difference between us and the Swiss. Every single freaking gun is where it should be, with whom it should be, and stored how it should be. Let me break that down.

Where it should be:
Either in the home or on duty. They don't hunt a lot in Switzerland.

With whom it should be:
In Switzerland know who has what and everything is accounted for. Damn those Swiss are orderly and efficient.
We do criminal background checks on gun sold by dealers. Yet no such standard exists for private saless. I could go outside right now and sell my pistol to some asshole pissing on my mailbox, who is strung out on meth, and has been without his anti-schizophrenia medications for two months. How any rational person can defend this defies reason. All gun ownership must be tracked and background checks must be done. Plain and simple.
Gun ownership is a privilege, not a right. If you have a car it has to be registered, and inspected. You have to have a license to operate it. To keep your license, periodically you have to demonstrate you still know what the hell you are doing. And when you violate the law you lose your license and , often, the car. The same standards should be applied to guns. Like cars, there will still be some that make it into bad guys hands. But we can significantly reduce the amount of guns held by the bad guys. And yes, the law-abiding among us can still get weapons after we established that we don't piss on my mailbox or have a criminal record, restraining order, etc.

How it should be:
In a safe or with a gun lock. That will keep little kids from finding daddy's gun and blowing their brains out with it. But wait! What if I have to 'get at it fast'? Keep the damn thing unloaded. Still not quick enough for you? Load it at night when you are sleeping and unload it and lock it up when you wake up the next day. It's the same reason I don't keep my car gassed up and running in my driveway.
I tend to get confused at night. If I reached for my gun every time something startled me, then my dog Fly would have died a thousand deaths when she bulldozes the bedroom door open. I would have shot all my kids at least once, when they've sought help for ailments in the middle of the night. Even my wife would have been capped multiple times after she has awakened me at night (usually on my birthday or when I have done something especially thoughtful or romantic earlier in the day).

Finally there is my conflicting emotions. I mentioned earlier that having guns around makes me feel safe. It doesn't make me safe, but I do feel safe. And that has value. I am also a Taoist, and as such I simultaneously value and despise weapons of any sort. People often ask, "what would Jesus do". I doubt he'd own a gun. Were he threatened, I suppose he could start throwing lightning bolts or unleash angels with fiery swords. I dunno. Also being a Mormon, the closest thing to Jesus, is what would Thomas S. Monson have me do. Call me crazy, but I'll bet that old boy doesn't have a gun either. If he gets up in conference and instructs LDS faithful to rid themselves of weapons then I will do it. I won't sell them, I'll melt them down. If I had sufficient faith I would have already done it since, according to Lao Tzu, Heaven protects the merciful.