Home / Gun Control Should Be Localized

Gun Control Should Be Localized

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Recently I was party to a discussion about gun control with a person from a different part of the United States. He was for taking guns away from people, or greatly reducinghand-gun-01.png the amount of guns available. I was for more education and better enforcement of existing laws. During the course of this debate one point became obvious: There are very few laws that can be created which will make sense in every part of this diverse nation.

Here in Minot, North Dakota, guns are a way of life. Just about every male in this state is an avid sportsmen. These men, and in some cases women, raise their children to respect guns. It is not unusual to see children in their early teens handling guns and using them for hunting purposes. It is also not unusual, during the fall, to see many pickups and vehicles with a shotgun or rifle stored in the backseat or back window. Yet despite this high concentration of weaponry among our citizens the amount of gun violence is very low.

In more urban areas most families do not own a gun. Even if they do own a gun more then likely it is kept in a closet and seldom, if ever, taken out. Sports like hunting or target shooting are not very popular in more urban areas so therefore less people are used to handling firearms. Therefore many people interact with guns for the first time during stressful times, like if they’re turning to crime or trying to defend their homes.

So North Dakota has more guns per person then, say, New Orleans, yet North Dakota has less gun violence. There are many arguments that can be made to explain that but the one that stounds out in my mind is education. Children in North Dakota are exposed to guns at an early age and are tought, by their parents, how to handle the weapons and how to respect them. They are better prepared to handle the awsome power and responsibility that comes with owning or handling a firearm.

Yet, whenever the Brady Group and the NRA get into a grudge match it seems to be over federal laws. I am no supporter of gun control, but I do not understand why they think a law can be made on the federal level that will solve gun violence? A law made for New Orleans or Los Angeles just isn’t going to make sense to North Dakotans. We do not have a gun violence problem in North Dakota. If California has one, let them handle it. Don’t punish North Dakota for a California problem.

By the way, the way to solve gun violence isn’t through more laws. There are tens of thousands of gun control laws already on the books. Plus, less then two percent of legally purchased guns are ever used in a crime. That means ninety-eight percent of all gun violence is committed by guns which were obtained illegally. They’re circumventing the laws anyway, what will more laws do to stop that? With that statistic in mind even banning guns wouldn’t be a solution. All you will have done is denied law-abiding citizens from obtaining a fire arm. The criminals would still have them. nraseal.gif

More laws aren’t going to solve anything. What will help is more gun education. Teach people how to handle their guns, how to store them properly and most importantly how to respect them. If we put our tax dollars towards gun education and stopping the reason for the crimes in the first place rather then gun prevention the drop in the amount of gun violence would be dramatic. Not only would the number of accidental deaths go down but many criminals would think twice before going up against an armed and trained citizen. These thugs aren’t committing crimes because they have a gun, they’re committing crimes out of necessity.

Be it money for drugs or whatever these criminals would use whatever weapon they have at hand. Crime is going to happen, banning guns isn’t the solution.

Also posted on Say Anything.

Powered by

About Rob

  • MEGO! Even a cursory examination of the data of gun ownership in the United States and crimes committed using guns would reveal that the so-called information in this so-called blog entry is not true. Gun ownership has reached a level of saturation, that is why most guns will never be used in a crime. The most common criteria for gun ownership is regional, not size of locale. Southerners are most likely to own and use guns. The major criterion for involvement in violent crime is gender, with age close behind. Boys and men under 30 commit most violent crimes, including shootings.

    I recommend that people interested in gun violence research primary sources first and then reliable writers on the topic. It is one of the most misunderstood in the country.

    Oh, before I go. State laws control in most cases involving the use of guns, so the premise of this so-callled blogger’s entry makes no sense. What he says he wants is the already the status quo. The inherently dangerous nature of guns means there will always be a role for federal law in regard to them. Ultimately, I believe that role will expand as the highest gun crime rate in the world continues to rise.

  • Rob

    I understand that your feelings are much different then mine on a lot of issues, but do you think you could refrain from personal attacks? I am not a “so-called” blogger, I am a blogger. I write and post to the interenet for my own gratification and to experience an exchange of ideas with other people.

    I would be more than happy to read your opinions and have debate with you if you weren’t so insulting. If you really cared at all about exchanging ideas or debating issues you wouldn’t come on in such an extreme manner.

    I’m sorry my writings make you so angry, but they are what I believe. If you want to disagree, fine, but there’s no reason for crabbiness.

  • Mac Diva:

    Canada has higher Gun Saturation than the US you rhetoric spouting puke.

  • sr

    Rob, Your blog was on the money. Dont be concerned with mac diva. He or she is just another anti-gun uninformed lib.You would do better debating a frog. I would like to send a free lawn sign or door/window sticker which I offer to our anti-gun pro lib friends. The color is fluorescent green and red and reads, “THIS IS A GUN FREE ZONE” Interesting that this free gift is always rejected. Can someone explain that to me. What say you mac diva? Good comment Jeff. Think maybe you have mac-the-knife in the 10 ring. GLOCKS ROCK.


    ok well i think ur thing is good im a 14 girl and im like annie okely and i dont think guns should be taken away from any one if sumone wants a gun let them have its there mistak and the punishiment they will have 2 surve if sumthing bad gos rong ya so ya dont do anything stuped