It has been some 30 hours since the horrific shootings in Aurora, Colorado. Even 2,000 miles away, the shock is still raw. I cannot imagine the suffering that the people involved must be enduring at this moment. To be sure, they are in my prayers.
During these mind-numbing 30 hours, people have given voice to the usual positions on gun control. I find this distressing—partly because of the volume and hostility behind these pronouncements, but much more because they do not begin to answer the questions deep beneath them.
Here are some of the questions that roll through my mind. Please understand that I am not asking them in a rhetorical fashion to defend one position or another; I truly want to know the answers. And if you have a position on guns, I invite you to post your answers and your thinking. I would only ask that you refrain from (a) restating tired positions and (b) demonizing the other side. Go deep.
That said…
For people who favor the unfettered right to bear arms:
- Why is gun ownership important to you? How has it made your life better?
- From your perspective, are some guns more dangerous than others? Do some guns have legitimate uses in a democratic society and others not?
- For those who answered yes to the previous question: If a ban on very dangerous guns with no legitimate use could reduce incidence of violence, why would that be a bad idea?
- Is there any connection in your mind between a culture of gun ownership in general and the incidence of violence? If so, how high would that incidence have to be for you to accept some limits on gun ownership?
- Why do you consider background checks onerous?
For those who favor limits on gun ownership:
- How do you feel about guns in general? Why?
- How do you think about the apparent randomness of mass shootings?
- What do you do with the fact that no screening procedure, no background check, and no limit on guns will eliminate the kinds of mass violence like that perpetrated last night?
- Are there legitimate uses of guns? How would you ensure that people can use them legitimately?
I’m sure there are many other good questions, but now it’s your turn. Please. More than ever, we need to get somewhere on issues like these. And we can only get somewhere when we talk—and listen.
Why is gun ownership important to you? How has it made your life better?
I live in a rural area where guns are more prevalent due to hunting and protecting one’s farm. I have joined a local women’s shooting league and feel confident in my skills. I have also taught gun safety and respect to my children. Is my life better? Well i feel better about myself. AND when my husband is away, I do feel more secure, so yes, my life is better.
From your perspective, are some guns more dangerous than others?
Of course they are. But even a dull knife can be dangerous in the wrong hands.
Do some guns have legitimate uses in a democratic society and others not?
It would have been nice if we never heard of nuclear weapons or if we still fought wars with black powder, but if it is out there, it will be available to criminals, so it should be available to citizens as well.
For those who answered yes to the previous question: If a ban on very dangerous guns with no legitimate use could reduce incidence of violence, why would that be a bad idea?
The answer is the same reason as banning certain drugs. The average honest person cannot get illegal drugs, but drug dealers and criminals can.
Is there any connection in your mind between a culture of gun ownership in general and the incidence of violence?
Seems when we all had guns, such as in the WILD WEST days, crazy nuts firing into crowds did not exist. If criminals KNOW that you do not own guns, it will make it much easier for them to take advantage of us.
If so, how high would that incidence have to be for you to accept some limits on gun ownership?
WE should limit the sale of guns to mentally challenged folks, children, people with police records and just as we give license to bartenders – people who seem a bit off.
Why do you consider background checks onerous? They are not onerous. I fully support them, but do not depend on them to stop guns from getting in the wrong hands.
Thank you so much, Susan and Lysa. And my apologies for posting your comments and responding so late. (WordPress, which is superb in notifying me of comments, somehow didn’t get the word to me on this thread–where I was actively soliciting comments. Oh, the irony.)
What you’ve written here are the most intelligent and nuanced comments I’ve seen on the topic. It gives me a lot of hope that we can get beyond the usual catchphrases to some serious conversation. Moreover, I find it fascinating that there is a bit of common ground across your various comments: for instance, you both see value in background checks, and you both see some role–however limited or not–for gun ownership in the U.S. I’m not saying we’re anywhere near a grand consensus, but even these small areas of agreement are more than what you might imagine if you just listen to the media reports of the debate and the folks on the strident fringes.
Lysa, one follow-up question for you. It may sound inflammatory, but again, I am asking this in the spirit of honest inquiry, because I sense that I’m starting to grasp your approach to this and want to learn more. You mentioned that guns “are available to criminals, so they should be available to citizens as well.” Is there a point at which–particularly because of the extreme danger of the weapon involved–you would moderate that stance? If so, how exactly would you moderate it? What comes to mind is that fact that some criminal groups probably have access to chemical and biological weapons. By what I hear you saying, those weapons should then be available to citizens as well–but that seems very extreme (and scary) to me. Can you help me understand?
I completely agree with Lysa and could not have put it any better. I am an avid upland bird hunter, a past Skeet champion in N.J. and a gun enthusiast. Guns are an integral part of Military history and some are notable for their engineering and the result of thinking outside the box. The designer of the HK once said when asked why he didn’t design a new gun, he replied, because I can’t. The HK is perfection for it’s intended use. This brings me back to the fact that not only is the HK a marvel of engineering and historical significance, it is a heck of a lot of fun to shoot. Bowling pins don’t stand a chance. In the hands of responsible people, this semi-automatics are collectibles and fun to blow up cantaloupes with. (think how much fun it is to watch Gallahger) Any one who’s every plunked tin cans with a .22 or BB gun can understand. The hardware is bigger that’s all. People who defend semis with the hunting argument are idiots. Anyone with common sense knows that’s just ludicrous. They give the rest of us bad reps. My favorite rifle of all time is the original M1 Garand sp? It’s an elegant, accurate joy to target shoot with. In this Olympic year it should be noted the number of shooting events as well as the Biathlon sp? in the Winter games. Target shooting is a time honored tradition. For those of you still hung up on gun ownership, consider the compound bow…soooo deadly and no one is bitching about them. Oh, and I shoot bows too!
Oh, as to the nut jobs who open fire in theaters, those unfortunates will always be with us as will serial killers, pedophiles and rapists. Banning guns will never change this sad fact of life. The only limit on gun ownership is background checks, which pretty much impose a waiting period. Again, I compare these to DL test etc.
Over the past few years, I’ve made the acquaintance of a certain gun enthusiast. Earlier this year, when I visited him in Florida, we went out to Starbucks and (because I asked) he gave me a sort of Gun 101: how they measure bores, what exactly a semiautomatic is, etc. I know Ed is a good guy, and even more than the information, I could see the enthusiasm and conviction behind his interest. That, as much as anything, started me reshaping my opinion on this whole topic. I mention it here, Melissa, because you’ve done very much the same thing in your post. By doing that, you’ve given those of us who’ve never held a gun in their lives a small glimpse into a different way of thinking. I appreciate that.
Melissa, thank you for your insight. Like John, I’ve never held a gun in my hands, except a b-b or water gun, so it’s nice to hear your viewpoint. My father and nephew are in the military; but my dad never kept his weapons in our house. I think it’s because one of my siblings suffered from very severe alcoholism that started in his teens. Sadly, my sibling often took to destroying other people’s property whenever he was drunk, including an incident when he did a lot of body damage to multiple cars just with a bb gun. That incident landed him in jail and in court. I think my dad was concerned that a gun that shot bullets in the hands of my drunken sibling would result in irreparable harm to someone or someone’s property. As a family, we would have felt responsible for that harm, so it was a conscious decision not to have a gun in the house. However, this does not mean we would extend our rules to everyone in the nation. I tend to favor limitations on gun ownership, but not an outright ban. I believe we can still allow responsible gun owners the freedom to engage in hunting, recreational target practice and the like. I hope you understand that just because I favor some limitations, that doesn’t make me want to take away your enjoyment. Thanks for allowing me to reply.
Suutzi, I am in total agreement with your family’s stance on having guns in the house. Very prudent. When I was living with children, my shotguns were fitted with trigger guards-devices that fill the trigger area and require a key to unlock-and in a rack with air plane cable running through them, also locked. The ammunition was kept in a completely different, distant location. Today, all our guns are in a vault with guards. Even I can’t remember the combination! We do have a little something tucked away for home defense, but it too is unloaded and ammo separate. It should be noted there are no children in the house.
Something else to consider when reading all this. I was in an abusive marriage that ended with my X trying to kill me with our .357. After all that I STILL have guns and enjoy them.
Since I tend to favor gun ownership, I will answer your second set of questions.
How do I feel about guns in general? I view a gun as a “weapon” like I would a bow and arrow, a bomb, or a knife. All of these things share similar characteristics. They can be used by a single individual (unlike a tank or other types of multiple-manned weapons) and they are meant for the single purpose of making a hole: in a person, an animal, a tree trunk, a bottle, or a wall.
How do I think about the apparent randomness of mass shootings? I view them as a sad artifact that we live in large, diverse, heterogeneous society where some people act on their inner impulses. Sadly, there is no society known to mankind that is able to control the inner impulses of its members. Try as we might, we sometimes don’t even see our neighbor’s suffering because they choose not to share it with us or we are too busy or distracted to notice it.
How do I feel about the limitations of screening procedures? The same way I view medical screening tests; if they are useful tests, then they assist most of the time in diagnosing a disease or identifying a problem for follow-up. However, I accept that medical screening tests are not perfect, that there are false negatives and false positives and that a good doctor will know that when reviewing the results. So, I can live with the imperfections of screening procedures as long as they are useful MOST of the time.
Are there legitimate uses of guns? Yes. I believe they are legitimately used by the police when actively trying to disable someone they know is in the process of committing violence. I believe a soldier legitimately uses a gun in the heat of battle, within the strictures of the orders given him/her by their commander. I believe they are used legitimately for hunting and recreational target practice. Although I am ambivalent about this, there are occasions when I feel a gun can be used in self-defense, but those circumstances are so wide and varied that I do not to accept that as an over-arching reason to allow unfettered access and possession.
In case it wasn’t obvious… I favor limits on gun ownership. Although I can accept that those limitations alone will not produce a peaceful and non-violent society.
I just saw this line of discussion and wanted to add to it. Gerry (my husband) grew up in rural Central NY, where you always had a gun handy to shoot the woodchucks, fox, raccoon, whatever “varmint” was out there harassing your livestock. So to him, guns were part of your life. He hunted for years, and one year, the only meat we were able to afford, was the venison he put on our table.
I, on the other hand, grew up in small towns and had no clue what a gun was or what it was for. It was something you saw on the Saturday morning cartoons, or on Gunsmoke. LOL.
When we first got married, we lived in Gerry’s neck of the woods, and all those years ago, it felt very desolate. Gerry came home from working 2nd shift one night, to find me on the bed, every light in the house on, the TV blaring and me holding a Shotgun, trying to load it with a .22 shell. All the .22 does, is dribble out the end of the Shotgun. LOL. Gerry decided right then and there, that I would learn to shoot a gun, and to be able to break it down and clean it.
Gerry then decided to get his Pistol Permit — he loves the look and feel of some of the smaller guns, and really enjoyed target shooting (until the Spring, when our Farmer neighbor would call to let us know he was letting his cows down in the field behind our house). A friend of ours, who was a Deputy Sheriff, told us, that I too, should get a Pistol Permit, as if I didn’t have one, and Gerry died — NY State would and could come in and confiscate his guns. Which, by the way, I would never be reimbursed for. I would lose out on hundreds to thousands of dollars.
I now have my Pistol Permit and LOVE target practice. There is nothing like it. Do I hunt? No, do I prevent anyone from hunting? No. I do, understand the thrill of the sport, when done the way it is supposed to be. And I love the challenge of besting that little red dot so far away. There was a time, when I would always have a handgun either on my person or in my purse. But 20 some years ago, I stopped doing both of those, as I had a child with Mental Health issues come into my life, and I did not want anything happening to her or to us. In fact, at that point, Gerry invested in a “Gun safe” — which is bolted to the floor and stands 6′ tall, that way, ALL guns can fit in it.
I didn’t really answer your questions, but just wanted to tell our side of the story. We firmly believe in NY State laws, which are one of the toughest, if not the toughest in the US. As someone else said, Medical test sometimes give false positive/negatives, as do the Psychological tests now given to people applying to guns. I guess the saying “shit happens” is pretty applicable here. Not only do dull knives in the wrong hands kill, so do nails, when put into a bomb. Which, btw, you can get the directions to build on the internet and before that, in the Encyclopedia….should we ban nails? Or the Encyclopedia? I think not.
Robin, this may be the most insightful thing I’ve ever read on the topic. For me, your story opens up an even deeper way of thinking about the topic. Thank you.
Please remember that aside from mass shootings like Aurora, every year in this country 22,000 children are shot. I will not go into restating tired positions with the numbing banality of our every day gun statistics, but I will say that better questions are appropriate here. For example: Should training be required for anyone who purchases a gun? (None required). Should homes with children be required to store guns unloaded and locked? (They are not). Should guns be regulated for safety/defects/malfunctions by an agency such as the Consumer Product Safety Commission? (None do). Should mental health professionals counsel their clients about the dangers of access to guns in the home? (They do not). Should pediatricians be banned from talking about safe gun storage with parents? (Florida 2012). If Americans asked “Where did the gun come from?” every time the numerous everyday shootings occur in this country, we would understand that the number one source of crime guns, unintentional shootings, and teenage suicides are from individual gun owners who do not lock them up. Should gun owners be just as liable as dog owners for injuries and deaths? Please, let’s have a REAL discussion, thank you.
Steve, you wrote: “Please, let’s have a REAL discussion, thank you.” I would submit that you just advanced the discussion we’ve been having–and I am grateful to you for that. You raise serious questions that, I’m willing to bet, thoughtful gun owners can address. To take one question: would they consider legal requirements to lock up one’s gun onerous, and if so, why? Hopefully they will respond here. Thank you for your contribution.
[…] events have nudged me into more reflection. My experiments with gun dialogue (last month and in 2012) put me in contact with gun owners and their stories about why they value their guns, the enjoyment […]