Posted on 12/19/2012 4:23:40 AM PST by Kaslin
PARIS -- Anyone who can't withstand a rational debate on the subject of gun control -- particularly in light of last week's Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in Connecticut -- should be automatically prohibited from ever owning a firearm. In fact, this should be the number-one requirement of gun ownership: Can someone applying for ownership of a deadly weapon withstand an hour-long debate against someone in favor of gun control without resorting to physical or verbal assault?
Is it too much to ask that every person wanting to possess a firearm be subject to a battery of tests -- everything from intelligence and emotional quotient exams to a psychological evaluation and background check? When America's Founding Fathers drew up the Second Amendment, they didn't do so with the mentally stunted, emotionally disturbed and deeply insecure in mind. Back in their time, life was relatively challenging unto itself, and they must have figured that anyone who could survive day-to-day existence could surely handle a firearm if need be.
A question that has repeatedly come up since the Sandy Hook shootings is why America has so much more gun violence than other Western nations. The best explanation is that the Constitution defines and underpins culture. In fact, nearly every element in any Western democracy can be traced back to its constitutional roots.
The Second Amendment gives Americans the right to bear arms, but in other countries -- Canada, for example -- the right to own a gun is not a given. The onus is on an individual to prove he's mature, competent and sane enough to own one. As a result, no one in Canada grows up thinking of guns as a natural appendage. Gun ownership is seen as a privilege one must earn. Is there really anything so backward about that? Or is it preferable to arm everyone and pray for the best?
Canadian law requires a license and a safety course in order to own, borrow or store any sort of firearm. Police conduct a criminal background check and a safety screening to ascertain whether an applicant has "threatened or attempted suicide, suffered from or been diagnosed or treated by a medical practitioner for: depression; alcohol, drug or substance abuse; behavioral problems; or emotional problems," or "been reported to the police or social services for violence, threatened or attempted violence, or other conflict in your home or elsewhere," or recently suffered a relationship breakdown, job loss or bankruptcy. If an ex-wife tells the cops that perhaps you are not sane, then too bad for you.
Such a regulatory process also means fewer guns floating around. But what if a criminal did happen to be packing heat? Would you wish that you had a weapon so you could have a movie-style shootout? No, you would swallow your pride and let him take what he wanted, then call the insurance company.
Believe me, I understand the acute frustration one feels when being robbed or otherwise victimized. I was mugged on the subway in Paris last year. We both could have had guns, but thankfully neither of us did in a country with tight gun control. (The perpetrator would have had the advantage of foresight anyway, while I would have fumbled around trying to find mine.)
So how can America go about fixing its gun laws? Well, it's complicated, because all the crazies are mixed in with the sane gun owners. Since there was no sanity litmus test at the outset, how about implementing mandatory license renewal complete with psychological evaluations and background checks? Anyone failing to comply with a basic psychological competency test should have his weapons revoked.
It would likely take at least a generation to better balance individual gun rights with everyone else's right to their own day-to-day freedom and safety, but the shift in cultural mind-set needs to start somewhere
Did you read the article?
Don’t be ridiculous
I'll try to remember all that, if I ever move to Canada.
Stopped reading right there.
Hate to break it to you but felons already can vote, in all 50 states. Most states have the restriction that they must have served their time and/or parole or probation. Some few are a little more restrictive but all allow it.
Maine and Vermont even allow incarcerated felons to vote.
What other God given right would you deny felons who have paid their debt to society?
confiscation by regulation.
Its the Automatic Media way.
It is the Automatic Media.
They only live in bloomberg’s NYC.
” Dont be ridiculous”
Sorry...couldn’t help but make the “Paris” comment. The only good thing newsworthy to come out of France lately was Gerard Depardieu.
Thanks for the threads/articles you post.
(I did read the article...and it was as I expected...someone else trying to “surrender” my right to defend myself.)
What kind of drivel is this, Rachel?
We have lots of people that die in automobile accidents every year.
You could have just as easily written:
A question that has repeatedly come up since the accident on I-95 is why America has so much more car violence than other Western nations.
Maybe we should outlaw gasoline. Or tires. Yeah, that's the ticket.
The left believes that a fundamental RIGHT is no more than a privilege, subject to their acceptance of its exercise.
saw on you tube—may put a different light on the shooting
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3Ep2pG3qY6c
I dont believe one should have to pass any test besides not being a felon, to have a baseball bat.
I dont believe one should have to pass any test besides not being a felon, to have a knife.
I dont believe one should have to pass any test besides not being a felon, to have a car.
I dont believe one should have to pass any test besides not being a felon, to have a can of gasoline and a book of matches.
How many of those do you agree with?
No it doesn't.
Repeal the Second Amendment, and Americans still have the right to bear arms.
The people coughing their lungs out in the "showers" of the Reich had the right to bear arms. They just didn't have the freedom/opportunity/foresight to bear arms.
The fishing was terrific, walleyes for the best eating, Great Northern Pike for super fighting and trout, perch and bass just for the fun of it.
My then 12 year old nephew caught a 56" Great Northern with a mouth so wide that you could put both fists in it at the same time {after the fish was dead}.
Over the years the number of our people varied but we spent between $ 10-15 thousand per year, depending on the size of our group, and now every one fishes in the states.
I've got a couple of french words for the idiots in quebec, but if I use them I'd be banned from FR.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.