- Posted January 9, 2013 by
This iReport is part of an assignment:
Gun control debate: Background checks
Gun Enthusiast for More Controls
Let’s be honest though. AR-15s, or M-4s, or assault weapons- whatever you want to call them- were designed for one purpose… killing people…and lots of them. It was not designed to be a hunting rifle and has limited utility in hunting except for certain small animals. I don’t need my AR-15. If the classic home invasion happens and I feel threatened I’m not going to use my AR-15 to shoot the invader. The 5.56 round it fires would go through the invader, through my wall, and end up lodged in my neighbor’s wall across the street. I have to agree with people who say that the second amendment is not without limits, ie you can’t own a howitzer or a 500-lb bomb. So assault weapons should be part of the conversation. I think it is reasonable that extended magazines should be controlled, although I’m not convinced “assault weapons” should be banned outright. However, no civilian needs a 30 or 100 round magazine.
I think a better long term solution would be to enact a requirement for a federal firearms purchase permit, to be renewed every five years. The purchase permit should be required for most firearms, perhaps omitting antiques. One of the requirements to obtain the permit, to include a background check, should be to obtain a certificate of good mental health from a doctor or psychologist at the applicant’s expense. I’m fine with that and would happily go along with it. Take the focus away from banning this gun or that gun and let’s make it just a little tougher to buy guns than it is to get a driver’s license. If you have the permit, you’re good. Commit a felony and you lose it. Perhaps also a requirement for safe, locked storage to keep your unstable 20 year old son from accessing your firearms.
Hopefully Congress figures out how to keep future rampage killers from getting their hands on guns in the first place.