Can we have some gun sense…maybe? Even just a little?

I know this is a hot topic right now, but it seems like over the past couple of years the issue of gun control has come up more and more frequently. Back in the day there might be a heated debate over mimosas at Sunday brunch, then in a fit, you’d slap a new bumper sticker on your car that says “We Need Idiot Control, Not Gun Control” or “Gun Control Means Using Both Hands” (depending on what side of the fence you argue).

Now—and you’ve probably gotten by now that this is a running theme of mine—social media has forced positions to be even more bitterly defended due to the great shield of distance.

The response to the terribly tragic death at the shooting range in Arizona by a little 9-year-old girl who lost control of an Uzi has brought out all sorts of gun control opinions on Facebook forums. A friend of mine recently posted something akin to “oh great, now all the gun control nuts are going to go crazy using this incident to back up their stupidly zealous claims that we need more gun control.”

And I’m over here like “well, yeah, duh.”  I mean, I’m sorry if people are going to pathetically use the accidental death of a human being by a now horribly traumatized juvenile as a reason to maybe rethink our gun laws. Excuse them for being so out of line! Why would they ever think this would be a great time to maybe bring up reform measures to our fire arms policies?

Can you taste the sarcasm? Cause I’m laying it on pretty thick. In all seriousness, it does seem that a point-blank shot to the head brought about by a child would be a great jumping off point for at least talking about the need for more gun control, especially as it pertains to children.

I hope this doesn’t make me sound like a gun control nut who wants to dump every piece of artillery into the deepest, darkest depths of the farthest ocean — because that’s not who I am at all. Gun control does not always mean anti-gun. Sometimes it just means being sensible. I’m all about moderation; moderation that perhaps prohibits a fourth grader from firing military-grade firearms. Is that too crazy of a thought? If someone uses a Dora the Explorer backpack, can we maybe consider keeping them away from Uzis?

I know I’m bringing the questions up, but I highly doubt the NRA is listening. I mean just two days after the incident they tweeted a highly informative article about the “7 Ways Children Can Have Fun at The Shooting Range.” So kids having access to the guns are not a problem in their eyes. Let’s not stop it, they say. Let’s keep it going, tweak it a little, and hope that it doesn’t happen again.  Really?   Was this a sane, or even appropriate, response to such a horrific tragedy?  Many things that people and organizations do these days worry me, sadden me and sometimes leave me with my mouth gaping open in awe.  However, this one…this one took the cake.

At the end of the day,  I can’t help but think that one simple common sense law or age restriction could have prevented such a tragic event… and kept a young child from being scarred for life.

17 thoughts on “Can we have some gun sense…maybe? Even just a little?

  1. One of the reasons why there is such acrimony is encapsulated in your sentence:

    At the end of the day, I can’t help but think that one simple common sense law could have prevented such a tragic event…

    The idea that a law would prevent a tragedy is laughable. Thousands and thousands of kids the same age shoot select fire weapons all the time and are not injured. But instead of education, instead of letting the parents decide — nope you want to pass a law (ironically enforced with the power of the government’s guns) to tell parents what they can and can not decide for their children.

    As far as I’m concerned, I’m not saying that people shouldn’t use the deaths like this to discuss issues. What I see is gun control advocates dancing in the blood of the dead; often before it is even cooled off.

    Instead of waiting to find out details (ala Sandy Hook), instead of rational discussion (such as you are offering) the gun control advocate try to shout down anyone offering a counter point – all in the name of the dead.

    Gun control does not always mean anti-gun. Sometimes it just means being sensible. I’m all about moderation;

    Couple of issues with that — first too many gun control advocate are anti-gun and make no bones about it. Many others have adopted the disguise of being moderate but their goal is complete disarmament. It is difficult to see moderation when every proposed law, every proposed regulation is yet another restriction on our rights.

    We’ve been ‘compromising’ and enacting ‘common sense’ laws and regulations since 1934 and the National Firearms Act.
    Nor does the evidence suggest those ‘moderate’ or ‘common sense’ proposals work.

    Think about the issue you are talking about here — one fatality due to one incident. We have children how have killed adults because that child drove a car or handled tools or drove a boat or ten thousand other ‘adult’ activities. Look at swimming; how many adults have drowned trying to teach kids to swim or save them. Under your view point we should ban children from swimming, right?

    Bob S.

    • I appreciate you reading my entry and making a comment. The way you’ve interpreted my views are not quite in line with what I wrote though. It is not laughable to think that “one simple law” could have prevented this one tragedy. I’m not discussing gun control in general or background checks or disarming the public or any of the other hot topics that gets NRA’s panties in a twist. I’m talking about one horrific tragedy that could have been avoided with some basic common sense or in the absence of that a simple law that forces basic common sense. The laws are notoriously lax for gun ranges and gun shows. That’s why gun ranges tout packages where children can shoot uzis in the first place. Because they can. This needs to change.

      To make my point another way, let me ask you a question: If there were one, simple common sense law…oh I don’t know…let’s say that children under 18 should not be allowed to shoot uzis even at gun ranges — are you telling me that licensed gun ranges would not follow the law? Let’s just say for kicks that they will follow the law. In that case, accidents like this will not happen because young children will not be shooting uzis at gun ranges. Problem solved. So even when all of the adults surrounding them have absolutely no common sense whatsoever, perhaps they will have a healthy respect for the law which in turn will keep children from becoming traumatized, most likely for life.

      • Tangled Mind,

        One simple law? How is it a simple law that equates a 9 year old firing a gun with someone just about to turn 18?

        See this is the issue that I’m talking about – no common sense that says a parent or range operator should decide if the child is capable. Nope, you want to make it against the law for every minor, regardless of age, regardless of size, to shoot an ‘uzi’.

        Now do you want to limit to that particular firearm or would be all select fire weapons?

        And while most ranges would follow the law, that doesn’t stop parents from making bad decisions. Not all select fire weapons are owned just by ranges. Individuals own them…so the question becomes would it stop all deaths?

        And then what — when a ‘child’ fires a semi-automatic instead of select fire weapon and a death/injury occurs, do you pass yet another law?

        So even when all of the adults surrounding them have absolutely no common sense

        Mandating people exercise common sense is an exercise in futility.

        It is not laughable to think that “one simple law” could have prevented this one tragedy.

        This is the idea that we can improve people by passing laws. We’ve tried that over and over and over and over again. It doesn’t work. It is common sense for people not to drink and drive; yet it still happens…And people die.

        Where does the desire to legislate other people’s lives stop?

        Bob S.

      • There is simply no way you will ever convince me that it makes sense to allow minors to shoot uzis, especially with respect to very young children. Currently there are no age restrictions at most gun ranges or gun shows (a few set restrictions themselves, but the actual laws are notoriously lax). That needs to change. We can go back and forth all day except I have work to do. I’m all for the right to bear arms but at the same time there need to be sensible restrictions. Laws are in place for the health and safety of the whole and there are times when situations occur to spur the need for revised or new laws. This can happen with any number of things, not just guns. Times change, laws must change as well.

  2. I believe we should keep our rights to bear arms but at the same time there is no reason that any civilian should be learning how to shoot an uzi, let alone a child. I am all for taking away the ridiculous high powered artillery, nobody needs that stuff for hunting or protection so nobody needs it period. Common sense just seems to be lacking in so many areas now a days.

  3. “Gun control does not always mean anti-gun. Sometimes it just means being sensible.” Yes, to a sensible person, that is a very sensible statement. But to those who are fanatical about their Second Amendment rights, and to the NRA, them’s fightin’ words. The best restrictions with respect to guns are no restrictions to guns, they preach. I agree with “mommyx4boys” when she says “Common sense just seems to be lacking in so many areas now a days.”

  4. Ahhh….I love a nitpicker.

    Gee, you would think that a law governing the conduct of hundreds of thousands of people would worth ‘nitpicking’. Guess not all rights are worth equal consideration.

    That is what is overlooked; this isn’t just about one death. It is about the rights of millions of people.

    Okay, so if I had said no one under the age of 16 should be allowed to shoot an uzi at a gun range?

    Again, who are you to tell parents what they should or should not allow their children to do?

    What would your argument have been then? We can go back and forth all day except I have work to do. I’m all for the right to bear arms but at the same time there need to be sensible restrictions.

    That argument has been used on every restriction coming down for decades. Just one more ‘sensible restriction’.
    I’m all for sensible restrictions but there is a difference between restrictions and laws. LET the parents, the people decide !

    Laws are in place for the health and safety of the whole and there are times when situations occur to spur the need for revised or new laws. This can happen with any number of things, not just guns. Times change, laws must change as well.

    Supposedly laws are there for the health and safety of the whole but is this a case where we need a law. The government has to narrowly tailor any law to address the concern and it has to be an overwhelming public health and safety issue. This doesn’t fit that description by any measure.

    Yes, times change. Gun control advocates apparently don’t though. For over 80 years gun control advocates have been trying to restrict the right to keep and bear arms. They use any sensational issue to push their agenda while ignoring the facts and statistics. Such as the declining rates of firearm related deaths, injuries and crimes for the last several decades. Such as the fact these types of accidents are so rare as to be a statistical anomaly .

    No one is stopping you or any other parent from deciding what to do with your child. All I’m doing is pointing out the busy body- statism tendency to enact a law to enforce your concepts of right and wrong on everyone else.

    When does it stop? We can not enact a law that covers every way that someone can die. Nor should we.

    Bob S.

  5. Guns are seen as weapons on TV and in films. Guns can be used as weapons. They can be used in anger, for revenge, to rob others, etc. Children see this everyday. There are drive by shootings, accidental shootings and deaths, well, you know what I’m saying. You don’t find that with swimming. A four-year-old doesn’t accidentally kill his sibling by swimming him to death. That is not a valid argument. Educating children in proper use of guns is a must IF you choose to teach a child, with an undeveloped brain, a brain that doesn’t understand the concepts that it takes to handle a gun, how to use one. Children do not have the mental capacity to do a lot of things, due to their AGE and DEVELOPMENT. It’s more than an issue of right and wrong, it’s an issue of mentally being able to understand death, right and wrong, and it’s also an issue of physical and mental control.

    Not every child who is given a gun has intelligent parents. You cannot count on parents to train their children to be as responsible as a child can be. Just like laws that stopped child labor, kids slaving away in factories (with the permission of their parents) we need to keep guns out of the hands of children, not only because they are not fully developed but because their parents cannot be trusted as well.

  6. And, we have a lot of insane laws, right? You MUST have your child in a carseat or seatbelt UNLESS they are on a school bus or the back of a motorcycle. We never had carseats before, or seat belts.

    • Sorry, accidentally hit the post button. Laws don’t always make sense to everyone. They mostly don’t even work. But there is no getting around the fact that children are not adults…if they were they would be allowed to go out alone, make decisions by themselves, and have control over their own lives. The would not have a bedtime or playtime or be told what they can and cannot do. Children need to be cared for because they cannot make those decisions for themselves. They can’t make certain decisions for themselves because their brains are not fully developed and they do not have any EXPERIENCE. They do not understand cause and effect. People in the movies get up and make more movies, after they have been shot and killed on screen. Kids do crazy things all the time, because they have seen things on screen and don’t understand the actual reality of what they have seen…THAT is why children are supposedly under the guidance of adults. Because they are not old enough to know what to do by themselves. We stop them from running in the street, from jumping off things, to see if they can fly, because they don’t even know enough not to do those simple things, things that adults do automatically. Children can’t drive cars until a certain age because they are not responsible enough to do so. Even after they are old enough, many of them don’t take driving seriously because of their brain development. It’s not about stoping people from doing what they want…it’s about facing the fact that children cannot fully understand what they are doing.

      • Very wise words. You’ve made excellent points. People often forget that children are children. They may seem grown up, but they’re not. And car seats are a perfect example — times change, sometimes laws need to change.

  7. I wanted to point out it is being shared that the Uzi gun incident with the 9 year old was staged and not real. That is what is being said. Also, I am a strong supporter of guns… but I was in the military so I guess we can factor that in. A nice post though and well worded! 🙂

    • Thanks for reading and commenting! I did not know you were in the military — thank you for your service! I’m from a military family (every male member was in the service) and a hunting one at that (ughh…on the hunting!) and I believe that most people should be able to own the guns they want. This entry was not an anti-gun rant — don’t let the comments fool you. It was more of a “why the hell are they allowing such young children to shoot uzis and where the hell did all the common sense go” rant. I hadn’t heard anywhere that the incident had been staged. I’ll have to look deeper into that because that’s a very interesting take on it.

      • Well I am being told it is conspiracy sites showing the video in slow motion and saying the sound isn’t an Uzi. So take that for what it is, we may never know. I am glad to hear of your background. Makes me appreciate this article more. 🙂

Comments are closed.