Time to Think 

By Hank Silverberg

                                                                   

Out of Control on Gun Control               

    On April 18, 1775, 700 British soldiers left their barracks in Boston and marched towards Lexington, Massachusetts where they were told rebellious colonists were storing a cache of weapons, powder and shot. Word quickly spread about their mission thanks to riders like Paul Revere, William Dawes, and Samuel Prescott. By the time the Redcoats got to Lexington on April 19, they were met by local militia. Someone, it has never been clear who, fired what became known as "the shot heard round the world" formally starting an armed revolution against King George III. The bloodied British force was stopped at Concord by a larger group of militia and never got the cache of weapons. It took eight years to win the American Revolution. It was war of attrition at great cost.  

(Single shot rifle replicas at the 1862 

Antietam Battlefield)

      So when those original colonies dumped the Articles of Confederation and  reorganized as The United States, with a Constitution and a subsequent Bill of Rights in 1791, the effort by the British government to seize their arms  was still fresh in their collective memory. The result was these words that make up the Second Amendment to the US Constitution:

     "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.”  

      Those words are not as simple as they look. They have been interpreted, misinterpreted, reinterpreted and abused for more than 200 years. Today the debate resurfaces each time we witness the carnage of a lone gunman shooting up a church, a concert or a school. The questions start. Does the right to bear arms have its limits? Did the founding fathers really mean anyone can own an AR 15? How about a bazooka, a tank or an F-15 Fighter Jet?  Then the rhetoric begins. If we ban assault rifles, it’s just one step from banning all guns! Both sides have hardened their arguments and seem unable to reach a middle ground that would protect those long talked about Second Amendment rights while dealing with today ’s weapons of mass destruction and war.    
   

    The concept of gun control is not new to the United States.  In the 1870's many communities including Deadwood, Tombstone and Dodge City, chronicled by legend and Hollywood as shoot-em-up towns, actually passed laws requiring that all guns be turned in as you entered town.  In the 1980's and 1990's many states and cities banned cheap hand guns called "Saturday Night specials" which had big impact on lowering crime.  A national ban on assault rifles, passed in 1993, had a dramatic effect on reducing mass shootings until it expired in 2004. (Attempts to revive it have failed). In Virginia, a law limiting gun purchases to one per month (as in 12 guns a year) also passed in 1993 and helped cut down on interstate gun trafficking. But that too was repealed in 2012.                   

         So what’s the answer? How about moderation on both sides?  Gun advocates need to abandon the “no new regulation” approach promulgated by the NRA with millions in donations to political candidates. A number of polls have already shown the NRA membership wants some modest changes. Despite all the rhetoric, no one has ever seriously talked about repealing the Second Amendment. It is not going anywhere.   There are over 310 million guns in the hands of civilians in the United States. Does anyone really think they can all be confiscated? Just saying that makes the NRA leadership, or anyone else, sound ridiculous. On the other side, gun control advocates need to abandon the calls for extensive bans on all guns. It’s not going to happen. They need to actively work for reasonable solutions. So let’s talk about some moderate solutions. Some have already been suggested: 

· Make bump stocks, like the one used by the Las Vegas concert shooter, illegal. (There is no purpose for a bump stock other than to shoot faster and kill more people faster.)

· Raise the age to purchase all guns to 21. (We regulate ages for drinking, driving, smoking and many other things. The Second Amendment mentions no age for owning a gun, and if it’s not specifically written in the Constitution, Congress can easily act on it.)  

· Require a 10 day waiting period that includes a national background check on all gun purchases. (Anyone accused of a violent crime such as domestic violence should not be allowed to purchase a gun. Anyone who has been treated for mental illness needs to be evaluated first, and anyone on the "No Fly" list because of connections to terrorists groups can be weeded out. This waiting period would also count at gun shows.) 

· Require anyone purchasing a gun to take a mandatory course in the proper care and safety of their gun. Those who already legally own a gun would be required to take the course again after two years if they purchase another gun.

· Limit the size of ammo magazines to ten rounds, (the shooter in the Sandy Hook attack had a 30 round magazine and killed 26 people) and limit the number of magazines to two at each purchase. 

· Adopt a national “one gun a month” law. (Does anybody need more than 12 new guns a year?)

(An interview I did with a gun advocate

at Gravely Point,VA in 2013)

All of these are common sense solutions that do not infringe on a law abiding citizen’s right to own a gun. The NRA won’t like them and will spend millions of dollars paying politicians to vote against them or anything similar. Some on the left won’t think these practical suggestions are enough, but the alternative may be nothing.   

 Here is one suggestion which will NOT work--arming teachers. First, I doubt many teachers like the idea. They are already overworked, and in many school districts--underpaid. Adding this just increases the stress and the likelihood of an accident. Second, having someone armed inside the school has already proven not to be a deterrent. The shooter in the latest Florida tragedy knew there was an armed Deputy Sherriff inside the school and it did not stop him from going in.  Finally, most school districts have trouble paying for books, updated computers ,copy machine ink and other supplies.  Now think about the liability costs for the armed teacher and school district if a teacher shoots at someone and an innocent student is hurt or killed in an exchange of gun fire. Let's leave the responsibility for confronting such violence to the law enforcement officers who train diligently to confront them.
           There are many other steps that can be taken and what we really need is to get past all the useless rhetoric and come up with practical compromises. Things just can not continue the way they are.


         (Comments and suggestions for this blog are welcome in the designated area below.  Please try to keep the comments civil and on the topic. Next week Talkin' Baseball)

Here is my latest novel . It's available at hanksilverbergbooks.com or on Amazon.com or B&N.com