Why Guns in School?

Firearms

And Their Safety
And Their Safety | Source

Newtown

Since the last horrific shooting in a school in the United States, once again the argument on gun control enters the center stage of debates.

Now it is being said that perhaps there should be armed guards placed in schools.

Excuse me, this is the United States we are talking about, not a third world country dominated by religious fanatics.

This is the United States we are talking about, the land of the free, the home of the brave.

What is becoming of the leader of the free world, the policeman of the globe, the most powerful nation on the planet?

Is this really the answer?

National Rifle Association

The NRA is one of the largest lobby groups in Washington and so they are very influential and can play a large role in many of the political decisions made. It is them that are now lobbying for this school “protection”: Why?

They will accept anything rather than have a review of the gun laws: Why?

New gun laws would not mean that they cannot go to a shooting range and fire a weapon of their choice. These weapons should be allowed to be bought but on the condition that they are kept at a proper facility, under secure conditions.

I am tired of hearing the NRAs argument that these shootings are not being perpetrated by licensed gun owners. We know that but the fact that guns are so prevalent; it is easier for a potential murderer to acquire them.

Let me explain my point.

Money is subject to being robbed and so it is always advised that you keep any that you do not immediately need, in a bank. There is no guarantee that the bank will not be robbed but at least it would not be as easy for a potential thief to rob the money from there. It is not subject to being robbed on the spur of the moment, it requires planning and often through the process of that planning, their intentions are discovered and their attempt foiled.

Often these school shootings are carried out by a single individual. Rarely are banks successfully robbed by a single individual.

Keeping assault rifles at home is a recipe for disaster. Often they are kept in an insecure location. Often they are held close to their ammunition and often their disappearance is not immediately noticed. It is this that has to change, not the ownership of the weapons.

Solution

So what’s the problem?

The NRA says that ANY change in the gun laws incur upon their freedoms. What they do not accept though is that freedoms come with responsibilities and unless they can accept the responsibilities then they do not deserve the freedoms.

The NRA also tells us that their members are all responsible people and so they are not the problem, really?

In 2011 a hunter, a fully paid up member of the NRA went on a hunting trip. Because he was a member of the NRA and a hunter, he was allowed to take his hunting rifle on the plane. Whilst at the check in desk, the rifle accidently fired and injured an airline official.

As to how a loaded weapon was able to get past the homeland security at the airport entrance I’ll leave for another day but will still ask how this could happen if the weapon owner was responsible.

Unless you are in a real “action” scenario, the safety should always be in the “on” position. On entering any building a safety check should be carried out, this means ensuring the weapon is not loaded with a magazine or has a bullet in the breach.

So NRA: if you are all so responsible, how could one of your paid up members have an accidental discharge at an airport check in counter?

Licenses should only be given to those that not only pass a background check but also pass a test on keeping a firearm secure and state where the weapon is to be securely kept. The police or ATF should be allowed to make spot checks on any firearm license holder, to ensure that correct security measures are being maintained. Failure would result on both license and weapons being removed.

We can get a license and drive a car but if we park it in the wrong place or allow it to be used in a dangerous manner, we lose our license, is THAT an intrusion on our freedoms?

Nobody wants to restrict anybody from owning anything; THAT is freedom.

Ensuring nothing you own can harm others; THAT is responsibility.

Let’s face it though NRA, if you want to feel macho and fire big guns: Join the military, there are enough conflicts going on to ease your cravings. That way less truly innocent youth’s lives will be lost, both at home and abroad.

More by this Author


Comments 1 comment

Credence2 profile image

Credence2 3 years ago from Florida (Space Coast)

I am on the same page with you, rafken. Ask the NRA why they accepted the banning of fully automatic weapons, the Thompson sub machine gun for example. I believe that restriction of semiautomatics with magazines holding 50 to 100 rounds is just drawing a previously established line just a little tighter. To be able to get at an assailant when they run out of ammo or have to reload could save lives and buy precious time.

I agree with you that we are all tired of being held hostage by this NRA

Great Hub

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working