Sigh. Something tells me this is going to cause one maelstrom of a :iconfluttershysqueeplz: storm, but I’m afraid some things have to be said.
Look! You all know me. You know who I am and what I support. I support the Second Amendment and the gun rights that stem from them. I know that gun control is a dumb idea—banning guns to prevent gun violence makes as much sense as banning marijuana to prevent drug abuse. But even someone as die-hard libertarian as myself has to concede that some freedoms have their reasonable limits.
Like any other red-blooded American, I firmly believe in the individual’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed in the Second Amendment, but recent events have since convinced me to at least re-evaluate my values—not a whole lot, but just a tiny bit.
If there’s one common factor with previous mass shootings, aside from the guns, it’s that all of the shooters involved suffered from some level of mental illness. From Columbine to Aurora to Sandy Hook to UCSB, each and every shooter was simply not right in the head. This is why I feel, at the very least, that guns should be restricted from those will mental illness.
Yes, every American has the right to bear arms, but when someone like Elliot Rodger is seeing up to three therapists at a time, and when he parents weeks prior to this shooting had him reported to the police, clearly someone like him should not be allowed anywhere near a loaded gun. Which is why, at the very least, there should be mental health screenings required for gun purchases. If you’re not a sane individual, you don’t get a gun. Case closed.
Do I believe that this precaution would prevent another mass shooting? No. Do I believe it will prevent someone like Rodger from obtaining a gun? No. But at the very least, it will at least provide somewhat of a safeguard from the mentally-challenged obtaining dangerous weaponry.
And fret not, fellow gun lovers: this is as far as I will go with “gun control.” No assault rifle bans. No national registry. Nothing else. Other than that, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Of course, I know for a fact that this suggestion will not be popular. It will please no one. It won’t please the gun absolutists who feel there should never ever been any restrictions on firearms period, and it won’t please the gun grabbers who won’t be satisfied until every weapon is rounded up and tossed into a raging bonfire. But, at the very least, it’s the most rational compromise I can make without completely selling out my values.
If you disagree with me, fine. I have nothing against you. Feel free to let me know in the comments section why I am wrong. At the very least, something like this should be brought to the table for discussion.