
RURAL RUMINATIONS
CAN WE MINIMIZE MASS MURDER?
By Haviland Smith
August 9, 2019
Recent
repeated instances of terrorist mass murder in our country have made it
mandatory that we enact legislation to fix the issue and ultimately
save our society as we know it.
As
a young boy, I was extremely interested in guns and hunting. Out of
deference to that passion, my parents enrolled me in an NRA course in
Vermont that taught youngsters marksmanship and gun safely. That was
one of the primary functions of the NRA in the l930s.
Later
in my life, trading on the lessons learned from my NRA education and
living mostly abroad, I participated in competitive skeet shooting and
hunted all over the world, from Europe through the Middle East. For
years I had access to a goose blind on the Eastern shore of Maryland and
took advantage of the wonderful dove hunting of northern Virginia. I
also served six years as a member of the Vermont Fish and Wildlife
Board. Throughout that period, I was a regular member of the NRA and in
the 1960’s became a Life Member.
The focus of the NRA changed in 1975 after the passage of the Gun Control ‘Act of 1968 which created a system to federally license gun dealers and established restrictions on particular categories and classes of firearms. At that point the NRA ceased being an organization that focused
on sportsmen, hunters and target shooters. It began to focus primarily
on gun control issues. And that is where it is today. The only major
difference between the NRA today and its pre-1975 predecessor is that it
has become incredibly wealthy and has gotten heavily involved in
national politics – particularly those surrounding the Second Amendment
of the Constitution and the election of Presidents and Members of
Congress.
Stated
succinctly, my interest in guns is in hunting rifles and shotguns.
During my perhaps overactive hunting days which pretty much ended when I
turned 85, I had a double barrel, improved cylinder/modified choke 12
gauge shotgun for upland bird hunting; a full choke, 12 gauge automatic
shotgun for waterfowl; a .22 caliber rifle for rabbits and a 30.06 rifle
for deer, boar and other large animals. Basically, that array of
weapons covered just about any hunting situation you can imagine. Guns
and hunting have played a major positive role in my life.
For
those reasons, I would be actively disinterested in any legislation
that would take those rifles and shotguns away from me and I suspect
there are literally millions of people in this country who share that
view.
But
we now have to deal with some new realities that did not exist fifty
and more years ago. We have people who seek to threaten much of our way
of life. Just try to imagine raising kids at a time when you would
have to train them to deal with armed attacks on them in their places of
worship, their shopping areas, their schools and who knows where else!
This new and horrendous reality has highlighted the wide existence of
what are really military style weapons in our society. It is perfectly
legal for you to have a semi-automatic rifle that can fire a round as
fast as you can pull the trigger and can be fitted with a cartridge
holder that will give you 200 rounds! The availability of these guns,
of bump stocks and cartridge holders to just about anyone who wants to
own one can turn anyone into a domestic terrorist. Please don’t argue
self-protection! You don’t need 200 rounds for that. A pistol or your
hunting weapons will do that nicely.
Why
are these guns available and why is their continued availability so
fiercely defended by the NRA? It is clear that the NRA decided years
ago that to give in on any attempt whatsoever to control guns would soon
lead to a total ban. That view persists and we see it reflected in the
NRA reminder to the White House this week that any (White House) action
will anger his (the President’s) crucial base. Clearly, the White
House does what the NRA dictates.
Any
move to control the environment that produces these mass murders is
welcome, including background check and red flag legislation, but the
only real solution lies elsewhere. In a perfect world, we would ban all
assault weapons and bump stocks, but if it’s OK to kill just a few
people at a time but not to kill a large number, then the answer is
clear – forget assault weapon and bump stock bans.
Ban high capacity magazines. An assault weapon without a high capacity magazine simply can’t hack it for a committed mass murderer.
No comments:
Post a Comment