Rumination on the Gun Debate

A friend on Facebook posted this comment below the video of President Obama expressing anger about the lack of will in Congress to enact working gun laws:

This is bull shit!! What we need is harsher penalties for those who commit the crimes. We don’t need more gun control. Don’t change the gun laws, change the penalties for the crime!!

That had me pause. I happen to think we need stricter gun laws, and we desperately need a national registry for gun ownership. We already have one for social security, for income taxes, for FBI background checks; we have state registries for drivers licenses; we have private registries for credit reports, credit card ownership, and spending habits. We have an international registry for opinions: Facebook. It is my opinion that we need a national registry for gun ownership.

Now about harsher penalties for those who commit the crimes? The crime for  mass murder in many states is death, and in those states where the death penalty is not available, it’s life without parole. How are we going to make those harsher? I don’t get this argument.

Many mass shooters end up dead in the act anyway. They apparently walk into the crime knowing it’s a suicide mission. I just don’t believe that any pre-meditated mass shooter gives a single thought to the harshness of the penalty. He wants to have as many people as possible to go down with him, in his hate or confusion. Do we really believe he’d stop and draw a pro and con list and then decide not to do the crime because the threat of the death penalty?

This argument has also been used with rapists. Really? A rapist stops before the act and thinks about the consequences? If that really happened, there would be no more rapes.

Stricter gun laws, here they come!

Leave a Reply