One Gun Owners Thoughts On Gun Control (Prompted by the recent shooting rampage in Connecticut)

 

This is a guest post by Dr Raymond D Fowler, Gun Owner, Avid Hunter and Physician

Dec. 19, 2012

The recent massacre in Connecticut by a mentally deranged young man has sparked a new, national debate on “gun control”. I was raised in a family of hunters and gun owners. I own several firearms, and I’m still an avid hunter. I’ve also been a practicing anesthesiologist for over 30 years. I’ve taken care of many gun shot victims over the years, both criminal, accidental and suicide attempts. This is my summary and opinion on the issue of guns, gun ownership and gun control in the U.S.

BACKGROUND

Despite anyone’s personal opinion, it appears that the basic debate on the interpretation of the 2nd amendment has been settled by the U.S. Supreme Court, which has ruled that private citizens do have the right to “keep and bear arms”. Even the Brady Center, one of the better known organizations advocating more gun control, has stated that the 2nd amendment argument over an individual’s right to own a firearm is “over”. What is not over, and what shouldn’t be over, is the legal and legislative debate over the details of individual firearm ownership; that is, who should not be allowed to own firearms, or have access to them, what restrictions should be imposed on legal gun owners to prevent those guns from being misused, what guns should not be legal for private citizens to own, and when, where and how should private citizens be allowed to carry a firearm, concealed or visible, in public — or should they be allowed to carry a weapon at all?

THE NUMBERS

The recent massacre in Connecticut is useful as a catalyst for the debate on gun control, because it has shocked, saddened and angered many citizens that have become calloused and nearly immune to the daily reports of gun related deaths, both murders, accidents and suicides.

Shooting rampages are shocking and always make headlines, but over the course of any given year the total number of people killed in those workplace and public shooting rampages number a few dozen. I mention that not with the intent to minimize those tragedies, but simply to put “shooting rampages” in perspective: Approximately 30,000 people die each year in the U.S. from guns, mostly one or two people at a time, and because of that, and because it is so common, it often gets little press coverage.

Roughly half of those 30,000 deaths are from suicides. I’ve lost two family members from suicide, and one of them was from a self-inflicted gunshot. From a simple numerical standpoint, the issue of suicide prevention certainly deserves as much discussion as the prevention of gun related violence. Unfortunately, I don’ t expect that to happen.

 

The per-capita murder rate in the U.S. has dropped to about half of what it was thirty years ago. Despite all the depressing headlines, the fact is that the per-capita murder rate (and other violent crimes) peaked in the late 1970’s. Some authors claim that this drop in the violent crime rate is because citizens are allowed to own and/or carry guns. I think they are wrong. The drop in violent crimes, including murder, has been spread across almost all areas, i.e. in areas where private gun ownership is legal and common, and in places where it is not. It appears to be primarily a societal, demographic change.

THE PROBLEM

It seems to me that avoidable gun related violence can be reduced to about four basic categories:

Access to guns by the wrong people

Lethality and conceal-abilty of guns, beyond any citizen’s reasonable need

Lack of training in gun usage (accidents)

Social “norms”: promoting the expectation of more responsible gun ownership

ACCESS TO GUNS BY THE WRONG PEOPLE

a. Private citizens who own guns should be required to keep them in a locked gun safe.

— this would dramatically reduce the number of guns stolen by burglars that end up in
criminal hands, especially handguns.

— it would also reduce the number of mentally or emotionally disturbed teenagers who
grab their parents’ guns and create mayhem or commit suicide.

— even a gun used for home self-defense could reasonably be kept in a lock-box with
a quick, easy push-button code that would make it child proof.

ALL gun buyers should have to undergo a background check.

— currently, a private citizen buying a gun from another private citizen does not have to undergo a background check. That includes people who buy guns at “gun shows”. That needs to change.

c. Concealed-carry permits; carrying weapons in public

— Many people have a strong, visceral opposition to the thought of allowing private citizens to carry a concealed weapon (usually a handgun). The fact is that the statistics demonstrate that people who have undergone a background check and who have legitimately obtained a concealed-carry permit, are much less likely to commit crimes of any sort. Statistically, they are even less likely to commit violent crimes than off-duty police officers. The killing of Travon Martin, in Florida, by a citizen carrying a handgun, may have more to do with the so-called “stand your ground” laws than the issue of concealed-carry permits. There are thousands of anecdotal reports of armed citizens who have stopped violent crimes with legally carried concealed weapons, and they usually do so without even having to fire the weapon.

— people who want to obtain a concealed-carry permit should have to undergo both a written and physical demonstration of their ability to do so, just like we all have to do when we obtain a driver’s license.

LETHALITY AND CONCEAL-ABILITY

Assault weapons: So-called military style “assault weapons”, even though they look lethal and sinister, are NOT any more lethal than a hunting rifle with a wooden walnut stock. The ONLY thing that makes them more lethal than a hunting rifle is the fact that many of them can be used with high-capacity magazines; that is, a “clip” or magazine of

30 or more rounds can be inserted into the action, and then the shooter can continue firing one round with each pull of the trigger without having to stop to reload. No private citizen needs that capacity. The large capacity magazines should be illegal. Given the fact that those magazines are easily obtained on the black market, it seems reasonable that any gun that was originally designed to accept a military style, high-capacity magazine, shouldn’t be legal for private ownership.

Conceal-ability: This relates mostly to handguns.

— I support the right of citizens to carry a concealed handgun if they have undergone a background check. I also support the right of a homeowner to use the firearm of his choice to protect his home (excluding high-capacity “assault weapons”).

LACK OF TRAINING

Currently, virtually all states require new, young hunters to undergo a hunter safety course before they can buy a hunting license. Over the last 30 years, hunter safety courses have been widely credited for a dramatic decrease in the number of hunting related gun accidents. But in nearly all states, a citizen can buy a gun for home defense or for target shooting without having to undergo any training in it’s safe use. That is not much different from saying, “OK, you are 16 years old now, so you can just buy a driver’s license and drive a car” (and not take any driving instruction or exam). It makes no sense. And the number of people who accidentally shoot themselves or someone else, and the number of children who get their hands on a loaded gun left unsecured in a house, demonstrates the folly of that lack of training.

SOCIAL NORMS AND RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERSHIP

Laws can only do so much to change behavior. Along with a change in some of our laws regarding gun ownership, we need to cultivate a maturation in what U.S. citizens consider to be responsible gun ownership.

To put this issue in perspective, consider what used to be acceptable in our society: When I was a young kid, I was allowed to stand up in either the front or back seat of a car while it was flying down the highway at 70 mph. The car had no seatbelts. I was allowed to ride a bicycle and use a skateboard without a helmet or any protective elbow or knee pads. When I travelled on an airplane, as soon as the plane cleared the runway, anyone who wanted to could, and did, light up a cigarette and the airplane cabin was soon engulfed in a thick, blue haze of cigarette smoke. All those things are illegal now, even though there was vigorous opposition to the enactment of laws about them, but even more importantly, they are no longer considered acceptable behavior. If one of your friends or family members allowed their toddlers to stand up, unsecured, in an automobile, or ride bikes and skateboards without protective gear, you would scold them, and not gently.

As a society, regardless of what we do about the laws regarding gun ownership, we need to a promote a new maturation in what we consider to be responsible behavior by gun owners. Even if remains legal to have all your guns just sitting in a closet and the ammunition sitting on the shelf right above them, it should be considered unacceptable behavior to do so. And even if it remains legal for you to go out and buy a 9 mm Glock semi-automatic pistol with a 14 round clip, it should be considered unacceptable behavior to simply take it home and leave it, loaded, in the bedside nightstand without actually learning how to use the damn thing and how to keep it secured so your kids can’t get their hands on it.

SUMMARY

I know there are many people who will vigorously disagree with me on many points. It’s common for people who have never had any exposure to firearms and/or hunting to be very afraid of them and simply say, “we just need to get rid of all those guns”!

Like it or not, that is not likely to happen in the U.S. What is very likely, however, is that we will see a major tightening of gun ownership laws.

But I adamantly oppose many of the kinds of gun ownership laws that exist in Great Brittain, Europe and Australia. Many of those countries make it illegal to keep or use a gun for home protection or self-protection outside the home. I think that encourages the “infantilization” of the citizenry. I think it encourages people to become passive, dependent wards of the State. And the numbers show that it has some serious repercussions. In the U.S., only about 15% of residential burglaries occur when people are at home. In England, nearly half of all burglaries are so-called “hot” burglaries that occur when homeowners are physically. Even with locked deadbolts, burglars simply break a window, overpower the occupants, quickly take what they want, and leave before the police can be called and respond. If an occupant was bold enough to use a firearm to stop the burglars, they would (and are!) prosecuted for breaking the law. That’s stupid. It’s immoral. I hope we never sink that far.

Disagree? Agree? Other thoughts? Email me……Ray Fowler Email address: [email protected]