Another view on gun control
In response to President Obama’s recent call for action, the Linn County sheriff has announced that he will refuse to enforce any federal gun-control legislation. Great model here: The county’s highest-ranking police officer will not enforce a law because he doesn’t happen to like it, so why should I obey some law I don’t care for? The sheriff’s statements are a disgrace to his office.
The Douglas County sheriff says he agrees, but he seems more rational. He will not enforce actions which are “deemed unconstitutional.” Fair enough. I just hope he will wait for court rulings rather than decide by himself on constitutionality.
I am totally amazed by some people’s hysterical reaction to Obama’s gun control efforts. First of all, it is absolutely ridiculous to claim that any gun-control legislation will “endanger our Second Amendment rights.” They are already limited. We are not allowed to purchase an anti-aircraft missile or a grenade, so what possible difference would it make to simply add another weapon to the prohibited list?
Just gun down an assailant during his assault? In 1999 there was one armed security guard on duty at Columbine High School and another close, yet they were unable to stop the killing of 15 and wounding of 23.
Unfortunately, there is no magic wand to cure mental illness, on which gun tragedies are often blamed. Yet many “gun-rights advocates” insist on leaving open ways in which anyone, mentally ill or even criminal, can instantly obtain the assault weapons and high-capacity clips which are designed for mass killing.
No one is trying to take away the hunting or self-defense guns of law-abiding citizens. However, common sense demands stopping the sale of military-style weapons and requiring universal background checks.