Gun Control: My Thoughts

Seeing as everyone and their grandmother is choosing sides on the issue, I believe I might as well add my two cents to the jar. The following is a post I made on an article on Cracked.Com (I know, I know, just hear me out!) covering issues such as video games, gun control, and violent crime. I have reworked it to make sense out of context, and I would be happy if anyone left me feedback in the comments section.
NOTE: I'm not trying to start a war or anything, I just want to say my piece. *Gets out soap box*

I own a gun because I enjoy target shooting with my father and brother; it's a fun, stress-relieving family activity when there aren't any car or scale-model expos in the offing. My father collects World War 1 weapons because he is a self-styled history buff, and his grandfather was one of the doughboys sent to Europe in 1918. My grandpa on my mother's side served in World War 2, enduring both the D-Day landings and the Battle of the Bulge. My own interest in firearms comes from their historical and cultural significance, and my interest in steam- and diesel-punk probably factors as well. But I also understand that owning a firearm means accepting a hefty responsibility, and I try to keep a realistic outlook as to what a civilian could and couldn't practically handle. (For example, I see no point in owning an "assault rifle" clone or maintaining a private arsenal, and feel there's no need for machine-guns or silencers in *any* civilian market.)

My family takes gun safety very seriously; all weapons are kept secured and inaccessible to anyone but us. During one of our early range trips my brother tried shooting his weapon "from the hip" and my father immediately rebuked him for it, warning us not to repeat the feat or we wouldn't be welcome back. My second brother is mentally disabled, and is *never* allowed near weapons or tools as the risk for injury–both to him and others–is just too great. We are but only a few of the millions of responsible American gun owners who have never harmed the wings on a mosquito. Any time fire-eaters on either side start beating their chests, I am reminded of the so-called "zero-tolerance policies" that have caused such a sensation in public schools; that is, rules which punish the whole for the actions of only a few. Whatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty?"

Aside from that, I find the practice of comparing the crime-per-capita rate in the US to those in other countries to be completely counter-productive. There are a myriad of factors that determine the rate of crime in a given area, including cultural/racial relations and economics, *besides* the legality of firearms. And enforcing gun control (or any legislation restricting general access to something) in, say, the United Kingdom is very different from enforcing it here. England is a small island nation only accessible via air and water transport, while we are fifty times larger with two of the longest land borders in the world; in addition, state and regional boundaries criss-cross each other from coast to coast. It is possible to sneak something into America illegally with nothing more than a shovel and a mission statement…in fact, given the state of our Border Patrol you could presumably just *toss* it over.

The Sandy Hook Elementary massacre last year was an unspeakable tragedy, and we should do everything necessary to prevent it from happening again. However, laws and policies are meaningless if they go unenforced, as mentioned above in our Border Patrol situation. For example, only a tiny fraction of those who lie on background checks for firearms purchases are prosecuted, and restrictions regarding the availability of weapons to the mentally ill are haphazardly applied at best. However, before we pass a slough of new laws we must determine whether those already in place are ineffective or are merely the victims of time and budgetary constraints. The more clearly-set our policies are, the easier it will be to implement them effectively.

Gun control has always been a touchy subject in American politics, and will likely remain so for the forseeable future. However, one thing we must all understand is that if we wish to exercise the right to bear arms, we *must* accept the responsibility that comes with it. Cracking down on illegal firearms trade through more frequent background and certification checks will be, at the very worst, an inconvenience for me.  If it means that innocent lives are spared while our rights are protected, just show me where to sign.

NOTE: Once again, I'm not trying to start a war, just wanted to say my piece. *Puts away soap box* Comments are always welcome!