So I awoke this morning to hear of two more shooting tragedies. One in a school in Roswell, New Mexico, and the other north of me in Florida.
Let me be abundantly clear. My husband and I own firearms.
Am I a sharpshooter? Furthest thing from it.
Can I handle a weapon in an emergency and hit a target? Better believe it.
Do I have an understanding and healthy respect for the power of a gun? Absolutely.
Should everyone own (and carry) a gun? Not if you will not be responsible as well as ready to take a life…because if you point a gun, you better be ready to fire. And accept the consequences of firing.
Of late, I have been involved in some heated debates over gun possession. There seems to be a viewpoint that every man, woman and possibly teen should be able to possess a gun with little to no restrictions.
In the first case of Roswell, New Mexico, a 12 year old boy brought a sawed off shotgun to school, and shot two students. No one seems to know why. A courageous teacher got right in front of the boy, and convinced him to put down the gun.
So how does a 12 year old in New Mexico get a sawed off?
Not thinking that he got it at the local gun shop…it probably came from the parents’ gun cabinet.
After the Sandy Hook shooting, there was some discussion about letting personnel carry guns into schools, or having armed security in the hallways. So if the teachers had guns (which some folks are proponents of), would the situation have ended as it did?
I submit to you that there would have been a lot more death and bloodshed.
In contrast, let’s look at the shooting in Wesley Chapel, Florida. The shooter, Curtis Reeves, is a retired police officer. He flipped out because the victim was texting in a movie theater.
Have we all been annoyed by that? Sure.
Do we feel the need to start a fight, then shoot someone? No.
I can script where this will go. His defense attorney has already claimed self defense at the bond hearing. The judge wasn’t having it and is holding him no bond until trial. Then what? Stand your ground. Again. Even though witnesses claim that the victim threw popcorn at the defendant, the defendant will claim he was in fear for his life (even though he started it), and that’s why he shot the victim Chad Oulson in the chest. I doubt this motion will be granted, especially in light of what the witnesses saw, and the woman that has come forward to say this defendant also harassed her during a movie because she was texting.
In all honesty, I will concede that gun control laws would not have changed the outcome of this situation, unless the defendant was found to be mentally ill at some point. He’s a former police officer, so he would fall into the category of someone who should be able to carry.
But looking at the extreme version of this. If the victim had a gun, then what? Shoutout at the movie theater? And what about people caught in the crossfire?
Too bad so sad?
All I’m saying is let’s be reasonable. If you need a permit to fish, a license to drive, and have to register to vote, why shouldn’t there be greater accountability for the ownership of something that, by its very design, is meant to kill? Why do we need to live in a society in which everyone needs to be strapped?
There HAS to be a middle ground, between gun ownership, upholding the Constitution, and keeping citizens safe. Let’s constructively talk about ideas, and respect that not everyone feels the same way about firearms.
Please keep the victims in your thoughts and prayers….especially the 3 year old who does not have a dad anymore because he died for texting her.
Food for thought.
As always, I am up for a good debate.