After the latest school shooting that has so far left ten people dead, saying “responsible gun owner” is no longer acceptable. Saying “law-abiding gun owner” is okay, if no federal or local laws have been broken, but don’t say “responsible.” Who defines what is considered acting responsibly?
The NRA’s definition of a responsible gun owner would undoubtedly include making sure that a teenage son has access to, and knows how to handle, the weapons that are in the house. In this case it’s a teenage son who was rejected by a girl he likes in school, which was apparently at least one of the triggers for the tragedy in Texas.
At the end of the 10th grade I was rejected rather cruelly by a girl I was crazy about. I felt extremely humiliated — her friends laughed at me — and I wanted to crawl into a hole and die. Or at least stay in bed for the rest of my life. At no time did I consider committing any sort of act of violence, but what about a kid who does experience that compulsion? A kid like that should not have access to guns. A responsible father would realize that his son has adjustment problems, and take reasonable measures to prevent him from getting hold of a weapon.
In the context of a mass school shooting, are a teenage boy’s feelings of loneliness and rejection going to be categorized as a mental illness? If you’re a boy, and you aren’t a good-looking jock — especially in a place like Texas — you’re going to have trouble fitting in, let alone being at all popular. Adults likewise experience personal failures — job loss, for example — and they get drunk, etc., and do stupid things, one of them being picking up a gun. There are any number of reasons why someone who is otherwise considered normal, and who has easy access to a gun, might use it.
The NRA’s argument that “the more guns the better” is simply ludicrous. More guns = more shooting. Duh.
An oversupply of guns, and easy access to them — helped by a lack of meaningful regulation — is the problem. The only way the NRA will agree to compromising its position is if it sees a serious possibility of gun ownership becoming a privilege, rather than a right. And why should we be listening to the NRA anyway? It’s not a government agency, it’s a lobbying group.
