My father sent out an e-mail to the family today about the recent shootings. As I've reposted some of his other missives in the past, I hope you all will continue to indulge me. Take it away, Khaki Kukri:
"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right [to keep and bear arms] is not unlimited. It is not a right to carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose." (Justice Antonin Scalia, 2008).
"We have a densely populated state, and we have an illegal handgun problem in New Jersey. . . What I support are commonsense laws that will allow people to protect themselves, but I am also very concerned about the safety of our police officers on the street. . ." (Gov. Chris Christie, 2009).
"I voted very strongly for instant background checks. I want to see them made stronger, probably the most important thing that we can do. . . And, in addition to that, what I believe is we need to do a lot, lot better job in terms of mental health in this country." (Sen. Bernie Sanders, 2015).
I am sad and angry at the news of the Muslim couple who shot up an office Christmas party in San Bernardino yesterday. And the crazy hermit redneck who shot up a Planned Parenthood clinic here in Colorado Springs last Friday (
[GB's Stepmom] and I are attending the funeral cortege tomorrow of Officer Garrett Swasey, the policeman who was killed defending us in that incident). And the riots in Baltimore. And the church shootings in Charleston. And the school shootings in California and Connecticut and on and on and on and on.
I am also sad and angry that you see stories like those almost weekly in the national media, but almost never see stories like the following in the national media -- but when you dig through the local outlets you find there are literally hundreds of thousands, possibly millions:
-- A disabled man had been robbed and burgled 5 times in the last six years, and finally bought a revolver. That very night, he heard a burglar breaking in again. Moving from his bed to his wheelchair, he tucked his gun beside him and rolled into his living room where he encountered the intruder, who attacked him with a steel crowbar. The disabled man shot him in the shoulder. Responding police found the wounded burglar hiding in the bushes and took him into custody after a brief struggle. No charges were filed against the disabled man. (Portland, ME, Press Herald)
-- When a Houston-area homeowner noticed a man smashing his car windows outside his home, he confronted the man and demanded he stop. Rather than comply, the vandal advanced menacingly on the homeowner who retreated into his garage. The vandal damaged the garage door with his crowbar so it could not be closed, and continued his aggressive approach. The homeowner retrieved a gun and fired on the intruder, killing him. Police declined to arrest the homeowner, who they said was acting in defense of his home and family. (KHOU-TV Ch11, Houston, TX)
-- An elderly Detroit couple was returning home one evening when three men, one armed with a gun, approached them in the parking area. When the armed robber grabbed the lady's purse, her husband took advantage of the distraction to draw his own legally carried gun. He killed the armed robber and drove off his accomplices. Responding police do not expect the elderly victims to be charged. (Detroit, MI, News)
-- A 14 year old North Las Vegas boy was home with his younger siblings when they heard knocking at the door. Trained by their father not to answer the door, the boy realized the door was being broken when the knocks turned into thuds and crashes. He and his siblings retreated to an upstairs bedroom closet where they hid with their father's rifle. When one of the ransacking burglars opened the closet and saw the older boy with the rifle, the burglars promptly fled. Fortunately, no one was hurt in the incident and police were able to use video surveillance tape from the home to identify and apprehend the burglars. (KSNV-TV Ch3, Las Vegas, NV)
-- and on and on and on and on.
We don't need gun control, we need violent perpetrator control -- which may entail restrictions balancing various rights in conflict, including gun rights. But you know which road is paved with good intentions -- can you prove that such restrictions are effective? Because it is a lot easier to give up rights under a perceived threat than it is to get them back later.
The key problem is how to make it harder for the wolves without making it harder for the sheepdogs. Historically, gun control has restricted ordinary responsible citizens' access to tools to defend themselves and their families from the criminals who ignore such laws.
Like Sen. Bernie Sanders, I would support a system of universal instant background checks to make it harder to obtain firearms for convicted violent felons, certain misdemeanor offenders (e.g., domestic violence, drunk driving), straw-man buyers, known terrorists, and the mentally ill who have been adjudged a danger to themselves or others.
Note that identification and treatment of the dangerous mentally ill is as big or bigger problem than the identification of willfully violent criminals. In 2008, 18,251 mentally ill persons committed suicide by firearm compared to 12,209 firearm homicides, some large fraction of which were also committed by the mentally ill. [CDC and FBI data]
In the wake of recent mass shootings, many have proposed expanding the no-gun restrictions to "suspected" terrorists (e.g., people on a government watch list) and to less stringent classes of mentally ill or suspected unstable persons.
The problem with this is the lack of appeal available to people wrongly placed in such classes (the accusation becomes the conviction, and without a fair hearing), and the likelihood of abuse by government functionaries of their political or religious opponents.
Should every Muslim in America be disarmed? Every hillbilly? Should any woman who was treated for depression after her rape be hampered from defending herself against another? Many more convicted shooters previously voted Democrat than Republican; should we disarm all Democrats?
Of course not.
So where do we draw the line? I suggest a preliminary test might be substituting phrases like "abortion rights" or "voting rights" or "free speech rights" for "gun rights" in any proposal and see if you still like it. And remember that "a law that doesn't protect someone I abhor doesn't protect me." (Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes).
This stuff gets real complicated real fast. The instant background check system in Louisiana was plagued with errors. So I would also like to see a Federally supervised State-run system that allows time for a more thorough evaluation, say 30 days, similar to the national security clearance system. It should include not only criminal and commitment history but also evidence of safety and jurisprudence training (ie, when are you justified in drawing your gun, when are you justified in shooting, etc.). If you pass you get a card certifying that you can buy, sell, and carry any firearm legal in your home jurisdiction. Like your driver’s license and marriage certificate, each state and city must honor the certifications of other states; in other words, I can't be put in jail driving thru Alabama for marrying a black woman, nor in Chicago for carrying something that's legal in Colorado. And like your driver’s license, it would expire periodically and you would have to rescreened; also, it can be suspended or revoked at any time by a judge for cause. Similarly, someone who believes she has been wrongfully denied can present evidence to an appeals judge, who can uphold the denial, approve full certification, or approve certification with limits.
The idea would be to certify the person rather than the tool. El Al airline of Israel has not had a hijacking since Entebbe because they screen for dangerous people not dangerous weapons. If you are allowed onboard at all, you can bring whatever you want in your carryon or on your person.
Efforts to restrict the tools of violence are usually red herrings. They distract attention and divert resources at the expense of dealing effectively with the perpetrators of violence.[DOUBLEPOST=1449193707,1449193626][/DOUBLEPOST]
I don't have to be tolerant of intolerance. When I advocate making abortion mandatory, that will make the arguments comparable.
You cannot countenance that there are people who have a different idea than you about when life begins. That's what I was referring to.
