Wednesday, January 22, 2003

I just got finished reading and posting in a web-forum where the discussion was the second amendment; you know, the one that is interpreted to mean that it's an inalienable right to keep and bear arms. The conversation was both stimulating and frustrating, as is the norm when discussing this vexing issue.

Am I the only one in this country that wonders why it's easier to buy a gun than it is to buy an automobile? I'm not allowed to drive in this country unless I've passed both a written and real-world tests. I have to renew my driver's license and car registration regularly. I have to have insurance (in my state) in order to operate the vehicle. I have to take an eye exam every five years to prove I can still see clearly enough to drive. If I want to continue to drive, I have to obey the rules of the road. If I drink and drive I can be arrested. It seems reasonable, then, that similar restrictions be put upon those who own any potentially dangerous technology, especially one designed to take life!

I've noticed, too, that in most states it's more difficult to purchase non-lethal weapons, such as mace spray or Tazers, than lethal ones. If owning a gun is for personal protection, why not let people protect themselves with non-lethal technologies? And since when does a hunter need the equivalent of an assault rifle to kill a deer? Why are such highly lethal rounds such as the .223 allowed to be sold to the general public? The .223 is designed to inflict the most damage possible, killing or at least maiming severely with a single shot. Wasn't the old .30-30 enough for hunting purposes? And why does a hunter need the ability to fire ten or more rounds in rapid succession? If a hunter can't hit the target on the first or second try, that hunter needs to practice or find another hobby.

If it's a "right" to own a gun in this country, why is it a right to do so with so little constraint on the type and number of guns? The state's can no longer have their own militias, something that's also mentioned in the second amendment. Maybe it's time to rethink the rest of that amendment. Or maybe make an appeal for repeal?


Blog Archive