When is enough enough?
The families of 14 innocent souls will suffer through what otherwise may have been a festive season with Christmas just around the corner. That shouldn’t occur in the most powerful, most advanced country the world has ever known.
Those 14 were killed Tuesday when two or three — the number doesn’t really matter — gunned them down in cold blood. Another 17, including 10 seriously wounded, are recovering from wounds, leaving their families also grieving.
The shooters used assault rifles, weapons designed for only one purpose — to kill people. They are a necessary evil in today’s violent world, but use should be restricted to military and law enforcement applications — not easily acquired by anyone who so chooses.
It is past time for the United States to join other industrialized — and civilized — nations that have realized armed citizens are a danger to society. Instead of self-defense with munitions, our focus should be on compassion for the human element. Everyday citizens should not have to think about “protecting themselves.” That’s what we have law enforcement officers for. Given the horrific character of Wednesday’s event — and last week’s in Colorado Springs — law enforcement responded with quick and admirable dispatch.
Putting more guns in public places won’t reduce casualties, or make us any the safer.
Bullets from a gun held by a hand shaken by emotion can go anywhere and if a gunfight breaks out, no one knows how many would die. Officers responding don’t have time to freeze action and have the good guys raise their hands.
The Register is not troubled by the Second Amendment, but it should be put in context. When it was framed, single-shot smooth-bore rifles that fired lead balls were notoriously inaccurate beyond a few paces. Battles of the day involved each side lining up and firing away, with only a handful falling from each volley.
Washington, Franklin and Jefferson, with much of his influence then by correspondence from Europe, knew exactly what they were doing when they proposed citizens have the right to bear arms. But, they had no way of knowing that years hence assault rifles could fire, with accuracy depending on the user’s training, scores of rounds each minute. And, the populace then was largely rural and much more homogeneous than today.
Also, they mentioned a well-regulated militia, in reference to the pending conflict with England and others they feared would evolve.
SO WHAT to do?
Now is the time to begin an effort — it won’t happen overnight — to make our country safe from a proliferation of guns in the wrong hands.
It shouldn’t be a Democrat vs. Republican issue, rather one of whether we’re willing — as Australia did after the 1996 Port Arthur massacre — to find fair and equitable ways to control firearms.
Hunting is very much alive in rural states such as Kansas, but that has nothing to do with finding effective ways to stop the proliferation of guns that have no realistic value other than to fatten the bankrolls of arms dealers and leave families mourning loved ones.
— Bob Johnson
