Today on Blogcritics
Home » The Best Kind of Gun Control

The Best Kind of Gun Control

I was born and raised in New York City. All throughout my childhood I wanted a gun. When I was very little, I had a cowboy gun that shot caps. As I got a little older, I graduated to BB guns, and eventually paint ball.

I finally decided to go through the process of applying for a firearms permit. This process involved meeting with my local police department, going through a background check, psych check, getting fingerprinted, etc and so on. Months later, the Police called me and told me I could pick up my license.

I went from the police station to the gun store and immediately purchased 2 beautiful hand guns. One is a Kimber Gold Match II 1911 45 ACP, the other is a SIG P232 .380, both in shiny stainless steel. These are not just guns, these are highly refined machines, works of art.

The Kimber Gold Match

I was nervous my first time at the range, especially because someone near me was shooting a magnum which is really loud. Each time it would go off, I would jump. But I calmed down and after pumping out 300 rounds between my two guns I started to feel more comfortable.

Since obtaining my license and guns, I am starting to become aware of the many gun control laws that exist, as well as those they are trying to now pass. While there are many rights afforded to Americans in the Bill of Rights, it seems that the second amendment is the one right that isn’t quite a right.

Imagine if the media needed to go through a background check in order to publish the news? Or if to celebrate Christmas, you needed to first obtain a permit from your local police captain. Would it really be a “right” against illegal search and seizure if in order to qualify, you must never have been in a psychiatric hospital?

However, the second amendment in no uncertain terms guarantees the people of this great country the right to keep and bear arms, yet this “right” is subject to substantive regulation by the government. Further, it is the target of ever increasing regulation by the gun control lobby.

As I stated earlier, I grew up in New York City. I bring this up for two reasons: It is a city with some of the strictest gun control laws in the entire country, possibly the world. Secondly, it is a city with a great many people hurt or killed by guns each year.

Throughout my life, I was told that it’s near impossible to get a license for a gun, and a CCW (carry license), is impossible unless you are a cop. Yet growing up on the gritty city streets, many of my friends had obtained guns, all illegally. One friend would carry a Tec-9 (a type of machine gun) disassembled in his hipsack. Another sold guns illegally, and had brought with him to work on occasion a 45 semi, .380, and a Tec-22 (similar to the Tec-9 but shooting 22 caliber – smaller and quieter). I’ve been around people shooting 25 caliber semis in the basements of apartment buildings for target practice, and I’ve even been shot at once in Bushwick Brooklyn (thankfully they missed).

I could have bought my guns illegally via one of the many channels that are readily available to anyone so inclined. However, I am an upstanding citizen, and I want to abide by the laws. But when it comes to gun laws, I really have to start wondering who the target of those laws are?

In any given state at this moment, there are attempts to limit the number of guns that you can buy or to classify more guns as assault weapons, or to reduce the bullet capacity of magazines even further. Interestingly, none of the friends from my old neighborhood care about the enactment of any such laws, nor will they be affected by them.

My guns came with spent shell casings, which are on file with the government. Should my gun ever be used in a crime, the police can pretty quickly identify where the bullet came from. My fingerprints are on file, as is my picture, address, etc. I keep my guns locked up and safe, and when I take them out, I follow all of the safety rules, NRA, range rules, etc. Many of my gun toting friends from the old hood slept with guns under their pillow. Ask them about NRA Rules and they might ask back, “What are those?”

About The Obnoxious American

  • The Obnoxious American

    Chrissy,

    I’ve never seen a gun kill anyone. I’ve seen people weilding guns who have killed people. But I’m sure you’d blame the Pre-traumatic stress syndrome caused by the gun on the gun-owner’s actions. BTW, thanks for calling me an idiot.

    Regards

    OA

  • zingzing

    oa–that’s like saying you’ve never seen heroin kill anyone.

    and you’ve seen people killed? (i have as well… well, one. wasn’t pretty.)

  • STM

    I forgot about this thread … this is where OA and I first butted heads.

    What OA didn’t understyand at the time is that I don’t believe in banning guns.

    I believe in licensing and control, neither of which appear to breach anything mentioned in the 2nd amendment, which also doesn’t mention that America, 200 years from now, will have the developed world’s highest rate of gun crime and will become a giant shooting gallery.

    There’s a big difference between ban and control.

    As for Ace’s question: “Anything else we should fix about America, STM?”

    Where do I start, ace??

    Mate, we’d be here forever …

    There’s a big difference.

  • The Obnoxious American

    Zing,

    Poor choice of words on my part. I’ve seen someone die but not from a gunshot (and I agree that it’s not fun).

    But you get my point. Even heroin does not kill anyone. It’s the person’s choice to shoot that junk in their veins. Heroin addicts are killing themselves – it’s not the substance or the needle or anything like that. It’s slightly different than the guns don’t kill people cliche, because heroin addicts, but who shoots heroin without knowing that?

    This is a fundamental difference between the right or the left. The left believes in regulating things. They don’t get that there is free will at play, and if you really want to solve a problem you have to address the underlying thought process. I guess in some respects, the right is guilty of this too (notably the war on drugs). In either case, it’s wrong headed. Deal with the mentality, not the inatimate object.

    STM,

    I don’t totally disagree with common sense regulations, problem is as I mentioned in my latest article “On Guns and Balls” we’ve seen first hand the types of regulations the left is after in states like Chicago and California to name a few. These are states run almost exclusively by the left, and they do not have common sense gun laws. What they have is an incredibly burdensome set of rules designed to keep law abiding Americans from getting guns at all. Of course criminals in these states have guns – these laws don’t seem to matter to them. So in the few cases where the left has reign, they’ve basically stopped gun ownership in their tracks. It’s hard to bargain your rights with a party who basically wants you to not even have those rights.

  • zingzing

    oa: “But you get my point. Even heroin does not kill anyone. It’s the person’s choice to shoot that junk in their veins.”

    heroin leads to addiction, which is a lack of choice. so it isn’t their choice to kill themselves. they don’t want to, most of the time. nobody even wants to get addicted. so that’s not a choice either.

    “I guess in some respects, the right is guilty of this too (notably the war on drugs). In either case, it’s wrong headed.”

    yeah, it’s the wrong idea. but, unfortunately, heroin shouldn’t be legal. or at least i, personally, wouldn’t last long if it were. some things are more complex than you let on.

    shooting heroin doesn’t mean you’re going to die. by that same token, owning a gun doesn’t mean someone is going to die, but it’s a damn good start.

    “Deal with the mentality, not the inatimate object.”

    if you can do that, then do it. but we’re not. or at least what we’re doing obviously isn’t working.

  • STM

    Have they really introduced laws that stop law-abiding citizens owning guns OA?

    I thought gun ownership was protected by the constitution.

    If that’s the case, do they really have a hope in hell of stopping that.

    Like I say, though, controls aren’t bands … and IMO, in a modern society, it’s not unreasonable for governments to want to regulate gun ownership, at the very least.

    Licensing and registration don’t equate to bans.

    If I want a gun here, I can get one. The government won’t stop me, but it won’t allow unfettered ownership of assault-style weapons or handguns.

    The only thing is, I have to apply for a licence, register the firearm, comply with the “cooling-off” period and abide by the law if I want to keep it.

    Sounds simple to me … just like having a driver’s licence.

    You obey the law you get to drive, you don’t, you lose that right.

    How hard can it be??

  • The Obnoxious American

    STM,

    Read up on the laws in California and Chicago. Close runners up New York, New Jersey. Bastions of democratic rule all. With more legislation on the way.

    I wouldn’t be against a drivers license for guns, but as I said, you don’t negotiate with terrorists. And when you look at what happened in these states it’s clear the left is operating on an by-any-means-necessary mindset. Sorry but it’s just a fact.