Guest Editorial: Stricter gun-control laws will only lead to more danger
Title
Guest Editorial: Stricter gun-control laws will only lead to more danger
Description
By: David Smith / Junior horticulture major
Posted: 4/23/07
Naturally, with the recent atrocity that occurred in Virginia at a college campus not unlike ours, there has been talk of tighter gun control and even outright bans to stop such incidents in the future. Do we not have enough failing gun laws already on the books?
I would like to thank Sarah Brady, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi and others of their ilk for giving us "gun-free school zones." Of course, I am being sarcastic, hoping that somebody out there will see the problem here and begin to think rationally.
This did not happen
because of a gun. More gun laws would not have changed the outcome. We need to stop passing feel-good legislation that only disarms lawful citizens who could be able to defend themselves and save others should one of these criminals attack them. Why make an estimated 60 million to 80 million law-abiding gun owners pay for this tragedy rather than hold the shooter accountable?
I'll try to put this in terms that gun-control advocates will understand. Every man in the world who possesses a penis has the potential to rape someone. However, most choose not to do so. No politician would try to introduce legislation to ban the said body part, and so, I ask, why is it any different with firearms?
There are literally millions of rounds fired legally for every one round fired criminally. Currently, there are 48 states that allow their citizens to carry concealed weapons in some form, and Nebraska was recently added to that list. One would think there would be bullets flying everywhere in these states from these permit holders - but that just is not the case.
I believe students at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln who have a valid concealed-carry permit should be allowed to use that permit on campus if they so desire. Had someone been at Virginia Tech last week with a concealed firearm, I am confident the gunman would not have been able to murder so many people.
Because the doors to the hall were chained shut, the police were unable to get in. The only way the rampage could have been stopped is if someone in the room would have had sufficient means to fight the gunman. This is why I believe students with a valid permit should be able to carry on campus.
Under Nebraskan law, you must be at least 21 years old to obtain a concealed-carry permit. For this reason, only upperclassmen would be allowed to carry concealed firearms. People should also know that the process of obtaining a concealed-carry permit, similar to most states, is far from easy or cheap. Many states charge about $100 for the permit alone. Then, one must also pay the instructor of the safety course another $50 to $100.
After one has paid for the permit and the safety training, the state then does an extensive background check of the individual, which takes months in many states. By the nature of the issuing process, only the most mentally stable and oldest of the university population would even be allowed to carry.
It seems that every day Americans are becoming helpless, socialist sheep to a greater extent. When there was a mass shooting at Virginia Tech, we threw the blame on GLOCK and the university for not canceling classes sooner. When Hurricane Katrina hit Louisiana, we blamed the Federal Emergency Management Agency for not doing enough. When are people going to wake up and take responsibility for themselves and their own safety?
No university, police force or government agency can be there all the time to save everybody when a tragedy of even the smallest magnitude strikes. Our increasing lack of personal responsibility and situational awareness, as well as our attitude of pacifism, only encourages these shootings.
It seems gun violence has become a real problem in our country only in the last 50 years. Before that, high-school students would often leave their rifles in their cars during school so they could hunt afterwards. Why were there no mass murders then? That certainly was a much simpler time. That was a time when people were very politically incorrect by today's standards.
A lot has changed for the better since then, but not everything. We all should step back and rethink what we call "progress." It is interesting to me that Hollywood, which is mostly left wing and hates guns, has no problem churning out film after film loaded with guns and violence. We are bombarded with violence every day, and, yet, when something such as the Virginia Tech shooting happens, we blame the gun. When people actually commit crimes, we slap them on the wrist and call them "rehabilitated."
We need to stop blaming the inanimate piece of plastic and steel that is the gun, try to improve the constant bombardment of violence in our culture and turn our legal system into an actual justice system. If lawmakers continue only to concentrate on passing more gun-control legislation and do not allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons, all of their work will be in vain, and I am certain we will find ourselves in this position in the future.
--
Original Source:<a href=http://media.www.dailynebraskan.com/media/storage/paper857/news/2007/04/23/Opinion/Guest.Editorial.Stricter.GunControl.Laws.Will.Only.Lead.To.More.Danger-2873866.shtml> Daily Nebraskan - April 23, 2007</a>
Posted: 4/23/07
Naturally, with the recent atrocity that occurred in Virginia at a college campus not unlike ours, there has been talk of tighter gun control and even outright bans to stop such incidents in the future. Do we not have enough failing gun laws already on the books?
I would like to thank Sarah Brady, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi and others of their ilk for giving us "gun-free school zones." Of course, I am being sarcastic, hoping that somebody out there will see the problem here and begin to think rationally.
This did not happen
because of a gun. More gun laws would not have changed the outcome. We need to stop passing feel-good legislation that only disarms lawful citizens who could be able to defend themselves and save others should one of these criminals attack them. Why make an estimated 60 million to 80 million law-abiding gun owners pay for this tragedy rather than hold the shooter accountable?
I'll try to put this in terms that gun-control advocates will understand. Every man in the world who possesses a penis has the potential to rape someone. However, most choose not to do so. No politician would try to introduce legislation to ban the said body part, and so, I ask, why is it any different with firearms?
There are literally millions of rounds fired legally for every one round fired criminally. Currently, there are 48 states that allow their citizens to carry concealed weapons in some form, and Nebraska was recently added to that list. One would think there would be bullets flying everywhere in these states from these permit holders - but that just is not the case.
I believe students at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln who have a valid concealed-carry permit should be allowed to use that permit on campus if they so desire. Had someone been at Virginia Tech last week with a concealed firearm, I am confident the gunman would not have been able to murder so many people.
Because the doors to the hall were chained shut, the police were unable to get in. The only way the rampage could have been stopped is if someone in the room would have had sufficient means to fight the gunman. This is why I believe students with a valid permit should be able to carry on campus.
Under Nebraskan law, you must be at least 21 years old to obtain a concealed-carry permit. For this reason, only upperclassmen would be allowed to carry concealed firearms. People should also know that the process of obtaining a concealed-carry permit, similar to most states, is far from easy or cheap. Many states charge about $100 for the permit alone. Then, one must also pay the instructor of the safety course another $50 to $100.
After one has paid for the permit and the safety training, the state then does an extensive background check of the individual, which takes months in many states. By the nature of the issuing process, only the most mentally stable and oldest of the university population would even be allowed to carry.
It seems that every day Americans are becoming helpless, socialist sheep to a greater extent. When there was a mass shooting at Virginia Tech, we threw the blame on GLOCK and the university for not canceling classes sooner. When Hurricane Katrina hit Louisiana, we blamed the Federal Emergency Management Agency for not doing enough. When are people going to wake up and take responsibility for themselves and their own safety?
No university, police force or government agency can be there all the time to save everybody when a tragedy of even the smallest magnitude strikes. Our increasing lack of personal responsibility and situational awareness, as well as our attitude of pacifism, only encourages these shootings.
It seems gun violence has become a real problem in our country only in the last 50 years. Before that, high-school students would often leave their rifles in their cars during school so they could hunt afterwards. Why were there no mass murders then? That certainly was a much simpler time. That was a time when people were very politically incorrect by today's standards.
A lot has changed for the better since then, but not everything. We all should step back and rethink what we call "progress." It is interesting to me that Hollywood, which is mostly left wing and hates guns, has no problem churning out film after film loaded with guns and violence. We are bombarded with violence every day, and, yet, when something such as the Virginia Tech shooting happens, we blame the gun. When people actually commit crimes, we slap them on the wrist and call them "rehabilitated."
We need to stop blaming the inanimate piece of plastic and steel that is the gun, try to improve the constant bombardment of violence in our culture and turn our legal system into an actual justice system. If lawmakers continue only to concentrate on passing more gun-control legislation and do not allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons, all of their work will be in vain, and I am certain we will find ourselves in this position in the future.
--
Original Source:<a href=http://media.www.dailynebraskan.com/media/storage/paper857/news/2007/04/23/Opinion/Guest.Editorial.Stricter.GunControl.Laws.Will.Only.Lead.To.More.Danger-2873866.shtml> Daily Nebraskan - April 23, 2007</a>
Creator
David Smith
Publisher
Daily Nebraskan
Date
2007-09-03
Contributor
Sara AA Hood
Rights
Josh Swartzlander <jdwriter19@yahoo.com>
Language
eng
Citation
David Smith, “Guest Editorial: Stricter gun-control laws will only lead to more danger,” The April 16 Archive, accessed November 23, 2024, https://april16archive.org/index.php/items/show/1278.