Do bear in mind that when I write these articles, they are not meant to be the conclusion, but to stimulate thought on the subject. What are your own ideas and how would you alter what has been written?
First of all, I’d like to address the argument with regard to the two sayings “Guns kill people” and “People kill people”.
Apart from a gun being an inanimate object, without the ability to do anything unless handled by a person, let's look at the staid Swiss versus the more excitable Americans. Far more people, per capita in America are murdered than in Switzerland.
So Americans really do need to look at gun ownership in a different light.
On the plus side, as long as guns are freely owned by their citizens, the authorities are less likely to lean too heavily on their citizens.
However, for as long as I can remember, America has not put enough importance, or resources, into Mental Health.
I expect howls of rage from people on this, but these are my thoughts on this subject:
- Every firearm owned must have a legal firearms document.
- To get a certificate for a firearm, the seeker should have written proof of a one hour session with a psychiatrist on being safe to own a weapon.
- If, after getting the pass, the gun owner goes and kills an innocent person during their first year, the psychiatrist must be barred from practising if found guilty of deliberately falsifying their conclusions for monetary gain.
- All guns on public highways must not be concealed. If they are, a mandatory prison sentence should be imposed for a minimum of one year. The only exception are rifles if they are locked in the boot of their vehicle.
- If anyone sells a gun to anyone without a gun certificate, there is a mandatory penalty of a minimum of one year in prison.
- Only house owners can own more than one gun.
I am sure most of you will, on reflection, agree with the first three points - or at least, those who are sane enough to pass. Point 4 will be a detriment to villains going about their unlawful business! Point 6 is one, I see, as a major sticking point”
By all means, “shoot me down” [not literally] on this, but at least have the decency of explaining why you think I’m wrong on any of the specific points.
Bear in mind, if you alter the actual second amendment, that would be a start down a slippery slope of being a precedent for politicians to start altering all the other amendments, including the first!
Andrew is @AmpersUK on Telegram Parler & Minds.
I received the following interesting email from Alice, one of my followers on Telegram which I thought I'd repeat here:
Maybe if the hour interview is videotaped and reviewed by, say, 10 -12 volunteer members from each local community, representing a broad spectrum of society, eg. garbage collectors, checkout assistants, teachers ,doctors etc. In order to agree on or question pre-set categories of personality and character traits.
I tend to feel that in most cases, that a determined, prospective shooter will always manage to acquire a gun, by fair means or foul.
It has to be said also, that this country (UK) has a growing problem with illegal gun crime.
It seems that a fair amount of planning goes into most mass shootings and that they’re mostly carried out in gun free zones where they are not likely to be met with immediate resistance, so much better armed security in public places has got to be a deterrent.
As you highlighted, there really needs to be more mental health awareness. Teachers and authoritative members of society should receive training on behavioural traits to notice and flag.
Students from a young age should learn how to recognise and alert others to conversations or actions they find unusual or abnormal or they feel uncomfortable with. If this was viable, I believe it would be the most productive way forward. Unfortunately, it will always be the most difficult because children and young people often have an almost unbreakable bond of loyalty to friends and peers and will never ‘grass’ them up.
Maybe a points system could be introduced from 1st grade onwards to monitor mental health, education, social,and family interaction and other issues. (This could be either starting at zero and awarding points for achievements and behaviour, or starting with a set amount and being docked points.) If a predetermined amount of points are reached by 21, then you should apply for a psychiatric analysis.
If the required number of points has not been met, then maybe an option to attend further psychological and gun related educational classes over a period of time could be offered… if the person really wants to own a gun. Otherwise,ownership should be denied.
I think the legal age limit to own a gun should be at least 21, although learning to shoot and handle, when accompanied by an adult could be acceptable from 13 years.
In the meantime, guns and weapons will always be just a few key taps away on the internet for the murderously intent, so that’s another avenue that needs to be seriously addressed.
All that aside,despite the virtue signallers and race apologists, ALL demographics need to be studied honestly and fairly. This would allow for concentrated action and education where needed most.
For instance, when doing a few basic searches on the internet, I found extremely misleading information. I recently saw two photographs. One stating that the majority of mass shootings are carried out by ‘whites’, whilst the other shows a completely different story, as at a generous count, I make 21 whites out of a total of 98 faces… and some of those 21 could be Hispanic, native American or mixed race.
I’ve also enclosed an interesting article that disputes the generally accepted narrative of the US and mass shootings.