Children have no business being taught how to shoot a gun. Yet conservatives wrongly criticize me when I have written about gun control in the United States. They seem to think that I - and other progressive liberals - want to overturn the Second Amendment. Not true. I respect our Constitution... and the forefathers who penned it. I am, however, confident that if the likes of James Madison...Thomas Jefferson...and John Adams...were living in 2016...they would have made substantial revisions to the Second Amendment. 
It was impossible to know in 1787...that semi-automatic assault weapons would be invented...and that anyone other than law enforcement agencies or the military...would find it necessary...for such..."death devices."To purchase a gun...all one needs - in some states - is a valid driver's license...and the approval of an "Instant Criminal Background Check." After that...an adult who is 18 years of age or older - at least 21 in certain states - may take possession of a handgun, shotgun or rifle. Also - according to Laws.com - certain states do not require an individual "to register firearms." So suppose a person never broke any law a day in his or her life...but now wants to go kill someone - for whatever the reason - that individual can purchase a gun...buy bullets...and be out the store's door...in a matter of minutes. That is not only dreadfully disturbing... but seriously scary.
I recently saw a television commercial...that advertised a shooting range - a perfectly legal business - for people to "target practice"...in a secure setting. But this ad promoted the use of guns...by children who are in kindergarten. A graphic appears on the screen...with the announcer speaking the words: "Five dollars for children under 12." Are they out of their moronic minds? Nobody can convince me...that three of our most esteemed Presidents...would have wanted...little children...shooting guns. No child should be shooting a gun...whether at a target range...or anywhere else.
The particular company noted above...happens to be located in a southern state...a state that also allows people to carry sidearms in the wide open public. All a person needs is an "open carry permit"...which is also not that difficult to obtain... based on an individual's history.
Walk in to a supermarket...and men and women...rich, middle-class and poor...white, black, brown, yellow and red...are "packing heat." Winter, spring, summer and fall...revolvers, pistols and handguns of all types and models...are holstered by everyday people...as if this was the late 1800s...when Bat Masterson and Wyatt Earp...hoofed the dusty, dirt roads of a cowboy town...as they guarded it from gunfighters. I surely hope that we never return to such an evil era. That being said, however...even in "the old west"...tiny tots didn't shoot guns. So there's no reason whatsoever...for prepubescent school children - and kids no bigger than babies - to be learning anything about guns...except that they should not go near them. The Second Amendment was not written to put guns in the hands of tykes and toddlers.If you give a child candy...the likelihood is...as an adult...he or she - at some point - will be eating everything from Almond Joy to Zagnut. Therefore, if you tell a youngster that it's okay to use guns...then, as he or she grows older...they're going to want to own one. Or two. Or more.
I absolutely understand that most bullet-shooting weapons are possessed by law-abiding citizens. But in the 21st Century...gun violence in the United States... wounds and kills tens of thousands of people each year. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention...about 85-thousand people suffer non-fatal injuries annually...with guns being the cause of more than 33-thousand human deaths - including over 11-thousand homicides and - believe it or not - more than 21-thousand suicides every year.
We must rid our country - in fact, our entire planet - of all handguns. And America must permanently ban the retail sale of all assault weapons. It may not be the only way to stop the murders of innocent people throughout our nation...but it would be a start. The United States cannot permit young children growing up... knowing that it's acceptable for them...to shoot handguns and other firearms.
So what about hunters? Killing animals is not my thing. But I do recognize...that certain species of four-legged creatures...environmentally need to be culled...to control the population of designated wildlife. As such...a sportsman should be able to purchase a rifle...that contains a chamber...that only holds a few bullets. There is no logical purpose for a deer hunter...to own a gun...with a so-called, "magazine"... that stores multiple rounds of ammunition.
Furthermore...no "criminal background check"...should be "instant." As noted above...it's possible...for anybody to go bad...at anytime. So for a person looking to commit murder - or to take his or her own life - with a 90-day waiting period...the odds of doing so...dramatically decrease.
When I was a kid - 50 years plus ago - my brother and I would play "cops and robbers." We both had snub-nose cap guns. Oh they looked real enough...but they weren't. And we were well aware that they were toys. We also understood that...real guns...were dangerous. Today, if a young boy drew a cap pistol on someone - even while playing with his brother - and a police office observed it...the boy pointing the gun would probably be shot...but by a real gun...with real bullets. But 2016 is not 1966...and children should not be shooting guns - not ones with caps...and definitely not ones with bullets.
As for a target range that advertises on television...and invites moms and dads to bring their children under 12 years of age...so they can learn how to shoot guns...well...that's just plain stupid.
And that's The Controversy for today.
I'm Gary B. Duglin.
"We'll talk again."
The Controversy is a publication of GBD Productions. Founder and Editor-In-Chief of The Controversy is Gary B. Duglin.
One of the chief goals of a blog...one of the major reasons to publish a blog...is to entice others to express their opinions about the subject for which the author is writing. The Controversy is being read by a tremendous amount of people throughout the United States of America and all around the world. If you agree or disagree with my commentary...your views are welcomed. Tell me that you love what I write...or that you hate it. Give your name...make up one...or remain anonymous if you prefer. The Controversy is your outlet to speak your mind and to say what you want about the topics discussed. Please share The Controversy with others by posting it on Facebook, Twitter and on other social media forums. Please also pass a link to everyone in your e-mail directories. The Controversy wants to know your thoughts on the column above or on any other editorial or essay written on this blog.
Now, please express your opinions. Just click on the word "Comments" below and write your remarks in the box that appears. Make sure please that when you finish your statement that you click on the word "Publish." Thank you for your thoughts and thank you for reading The Controversy.
Photo credits: biography.com (former President James Madison), biography.com (former President Thomas Jefferson), modernfarmer.com (former President John Adams), bluffeurope.com (Marshal Bat Masterson), todayifoundout.com (Marshal Wyatt Earp) and nbcnews.com (former Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton)
Copyright 2016 Gary B. Duglin and TheControversy.net. All Rights Reserved.
You may believe that our forefathers would have made substantial revisions to the second amendment but I think you are incorrect. First off Jefferson was not at the Constitutional Convention he was in Paris serving as minister to France. James Madison said the following “The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms”. Alexander Hamilton said “The constitution shall never be construed...to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” Next children that live in homes with firearms should be taught about them and how to use them and how to safely handle them. You make a comparison for children about candy and then try to suggest that it would be wrong for them when they grow up to want a gun or two or more. What is wrong with wanting to own a gun? It is your RIGHT as an American! As for you suggestion of a 90 day waiting list, should you have to wait 90 days for your free speech, or freedom of religion? The RIGHT to own and bear arms shall not be infringed. 90 day wait sounds like an infringement to me! Why would we want to as you put it: “We must rid our country - in fact, our entire planet - of all handguns”? This will never happen, guns are part of the American culture, they are part of the American way of life, there are over 310,000,000 guns here growing at a rate of about 15,000,000 mostly handguns more per year. As for you making this into a Hillary campaign ad, she has been protected by men (and women) with guns for most of her adult life, but you and she don’t want us common folk to be able to protect ourselves. We are just “the people” our rights don’t count to people like her or the rest of the far left like you!
ReplyDeleteHistorians say that Thomas Jefferson was involved with the original draft of the U.S. Constitution. I do believe wholeheartedly that if our forefathers knew that 33,000 people died every year at the hands of guns - including the deaths of innocent children and innocent other people - they would have made - as I stated - "substantial revisions." Unfortunately, neither you nor I will ever know, for sure, what they would have done. If you believe in heaven, perhaps down the road (and I hope many, many decades from now), I (or you) can ask our nation's founders what, in fact, they would have done. Your point, however, that it is an American's "right to own and bear arms" is true. I do not dispute that. What I argue is that our country and our world were altogether different 200-plus years ago when the Second Amendment was written. Thus, my reason for change. As for making this - as you say - "a Hillary campaign ad," well...if you're a regular reader of The Controversy, you should know that any political issue today - until November 8th - I will tie in...to do what I can...to sway Democrats for Bernie Sanders, Independents - and yes, even Republicans who don't support Donald Trump, Ted Cruz or John Kasich - in to casting their ballots for Hillary Clinton. And gun control is a major issue. True, Secretary Clinton is protected every day of her life by the United States Secret Service - and I'm grateful for that - but those duly sworn agents are not about to go and murder innocent human beings. If I could be 100% certain that no person would wrongfully and sinfully kill another person, I would not object to the "RIGHT" of us "common folk" owning or carrying guns. But, of course, neither you nor I can guarantee that. As I stated in my commentary, any individual - somebody who has been a law abiding citizen all his or her life - could possibly get angry enough to go shoot someone...and then regret it later. So it's not just the mentally deranged, but the person who has a momentary mental breakdown and commits a crime that under normal circumstances he or she would never commit. A 90-day waiting period would hopefully cool down and calm down that type of person from shooting another person or, for that matter, shooting himself or herself. Yes, I proudly acknowledge that I am to the "far left." But I believe I am "right" (as in correct) with my thinking. But thank you for your well-thought out debate, despite the fact that I disagree with you. Unlike some others who respond to The Controversy, you wrote a comment that did not include some of the profanities and attacks that others have used. Thank you. GBD
DeleteP.S. - One more point - which was the crux of my commentary that you did not address - although I oppose the use of guns by anybody - I will never understand how anybody would want to teach a 5-year old kid how to use a gun. It disturbs me that a shooting range would promote a $5 fee so that mothers and fathers could bring children under 12 years of age to practice shooting a gun. As I stated in my commentary - "that's just plain stupid." GBD
ReplyDeleteThe question is why you wouldn’t want to teach a youngster how to shoot at a range, the first thing you learn at a range is gun safety. It is important that everyone living in a home with guns be taught gun safety. I know as a gun owner (hand gun) and most if not all gun owners I know have had their children at a range between the ages of 10-12 years old, some even younger, teaching gun safety. As for your statement “that’s just plain stupid” it’s not, the younger they start the safer they are around guns and the better shot they will be. And for those that will do bad things, our country was not built on the idea that you punish or restrict many to prevent a few. If you did that it would be guilty until proven innocent.
ReplyDeleteOkay here's my point. Now granted, I'm against guns. I think I've been clear on that. But be that as it may, let's just say - for your point of view...and the fact that the Second Amendment does give you the right to have a gun in your home - I certainly would want a child to be taught about "gun safety" and for you to tell your kid(s) to "never, ever touch or go near Daddy's gun." I certainly understand that if you do own a gun for you to say to your child(ren), "If you have questions, come to Daddy and ask me, but never, ever go near Daddy's gun without me with you." Furthermore, I would surely hope that your gun is (or guns are) locked up tighter than a drum so that no child could ever get near it (them). All that being said, I still don't want Americans to own handguns for the reasons I specified in my commentary and in my subsequent responses. But here's my main point... teaching a child gun safety is one thing, but actually bringing a 5-year old - or, for that matter, any young kid to a shooting range, I still must say that is "just plain stupid." Teaching a youngster about "gun safety" is much different than actually letting a child shoot a gun. You'll never get me to think that there is any reason for a parent to do that with their children. GBD
DeleteP.S. - Despite our disagreements, which unlike some Republicans/Conservatives - and I will admit, some Democrats/Liberals/Progressives too - you seem to be someone who is capable of having an intelligent conversation and to debate opposing views. I don't know if you've been a regular reader of The Controversy for months or even years, but, if not, please check out the archives on the right side of the blog and please look for my commentaries each week. I generally try to write once a week, but with Campaign 2016 in full swing, I have been sometimes writing more often. Just log on to www.TheControversy.net regularly and I always welcome opposing points of view. Of course, I always welcome opinions by people who agree with me. I would greatly appreciate it if you would share a link to my blog with your Republican friends and your Democratic friends. Please post a link on your Facebook page, Twitter feeds and e-mails. Thank you very much. GBD
DeleteGuns are here to stay. Deal with it. Just like automobiles, which, incidentally, happen to kill more people than guns, but there's no outcry over strict car laws. An 80 yr old just protected himself the other day from 3 would-be robbers who coerced their way into his home, figuring he was an easy target. The cops found 1 dead in the street with a gunshot wound to the head, another nearby with a gunshot whisk abdomen, and the 3rd, a female, scampered off unharmed but was later apprehended. THAT'S why the 2nd Amendment is in place; the U.S. citizens have a right to defend what is rightfully theirs, by any means necessary, including guns. Kudos to the 80 yr old; 2 out of 3 ain't bad.
ReplyDeleteJust as we are trained to safely use any tool we handle, be it a pair of scissors, a power saw, a power nail gun, any knife, a fireplace poker, automobiles, and yes, guns, the earlier we start learning about these things and teaching others, the sooner, and more likely, we will learn to respect such tools and machines. It's the crazy people will the ill intentions we ought to be addressing. 10 dead people whether is from a mass shooting or a car driving through a crowded farmer's market committed by sick individuals are still 10 dead people. It is just as easy to shoot them as it is to drive over them; in both cases the victims were unsuspecting of any such occurrence about to unfold. Yet we still drive our cars around, trusting the other drivers to be properly trained, licensed, awake, sober,alert, etc. The same ought to be granted to contractors using nail guns on the job, firemen using their axes, teachers using scissors, policemen using their guns, as well as to the average American citizen who went through the proper training and licensing efforts to be a responsible owner. It applies all over the course of life, in many areas, yet the left, using emotion as a tactic, target guns. This is why you people on the left, ought to be in prison; a liberal utopian paradise, while the rest of us put on our big boy pants everyday to go about enjoying ALL of our God-given constitutional rights. Good day.
My commentary speaks for itself. I have nothing further to add except that you must be a real "hater" to make a horrible statement that "people on the left ought to be in prison." Shame on you. Shame, shame, shame on you. A Democrat would never make such a comment about a Republican. GBD
DeleteYeah, right. It's already been said. You people are ridiculous and need to be put out of OUR misery.
ReplyDeleteFor anyone to make such a threat against a journalist because of comments made in an editorial is not only disgusting, but sinful and illegal. Watch what you say by insinuating that liberals "need to be put out of OUR misery." GBD
Delete