In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Quit taking aim at gun owners
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Quit taking aim at gun owners
By Ronald J.Sonnenberg | My Word
Posted July 18, 2002
Email this story to a friend
Printer friendly version
Perhaps this should be in the "Ticked Off" section of the paper because I was really ticked off by the huge spread "Lax Laws, Loose Guns" by Henry Pierson Curtis that appeared in the Sunday edition.
When in the name of common sense, will victims stop being blamed for the crimes of the perpetrators?
The victims in this case are those from whom guns were stolen. A crime also was committed when the guns were taken, not only when used in the commission of a robbery or murder.
It's so easy to blame the law-abiding person who owns guns just because he or she desires to have a weapon accessible for defense.
Let me briefly relate a true incident in my life.
During the dark, early-morning hours in 1973, my terrified son awoke me to report someone was trying to enter his bedroom window. I immediately retrieved my pistol from its secure location. The weapon was not loaded because I had children in the house. Now, let me tell you -- despite being an active-duty military officer at the time -- I quickly realized I was not John Wayne.
Trembling with fear, I attempted to load the pistol. I might as well have tried to put square pegs into round holes, as the bullets missed the cylinder and tumbled to the floor. Fortunately, the would-be intruder fled.
So, you see, common sense and logic sometimes dictate the necessity to keep a loaded weapon handy for self-protection or for the safety of one's family.
For those who have lost a loved one at the hands of a person using a stolen gun, I have the deepest sympathy. But stop pointing the finger of blame at the gun owner. Guns used in such crimes could well have been stolen from a pawnshop, a gunsmith or from a home where it was in a locked cabinet and also had a trigger lock on it.
Curtis wrote, "For one thing, gun owners don't have to register firearms, meaning the number of privately owned guns in the state is unknown." So what? What business is it of the state, and how would registration prevent guns from being stolen?
I guess a person before stealing a gun to rob or murder says, "Oh, perhaps I shouldn't steal this -- it might be registered." Aren't there enough laws on the books? Does a law have to be passed to dictate to law-abiding citizens how they're to maintain their guns?
I suspect many others would have reacted similarly to me in a potentially life-threatening situation. A law requiring a homeowner's gun to be locked and unloaded at all times would place the "bad guys" at a distinct advantage. What benefit is the right to own a gun if restrictions render them useless in an emergency?
Ronald J. Sonnenberg lives in Grand Island
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/orl-edpmyword18071802jul18.story?coll=orl-opinion-headlines
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
By Ronald J.Sonnenberg | My Word
Posted July 18, 2002
Email this story to a friend
Printer friendly version
Perhaps this should be in the "Ticked Off" section of the paper because I was really ticked off by the huge spread "Lax Laws, Loose Guns" by Henry Pierson Curtis that appeared in the Sunday edition.
When in the name of common sense, will victims stop being blamed for the crimes of the perpetrators?
The victims in this case are those from whom guns were stolen. A crime also was committed when the guns were taken, not only when used in the commission of a robbery or murder.
It's so easy to blame the law-abiding person who owns guns just because he or she desires to have a weapon accessible for defense.
Let me briefly relate a true incident in my life.
During the dark, early-morning hours in 1973, my terrified son awoke me to report someone was trying to enter his bedroom window. I immediately retrieved my pistol from its secure location. The weapon was not loaded because I had children in the house. Now, let me tell you -- despite being an active-duty military officer at the time -- I quickly realized I was not John Wayne.
Trembling with fear, I attempted to load the pistol. I might as well have tried to put square pegs into round holes, as the bullets missed the cylinder and tumbled to the floor. Fortunately, the would-be intruder fled.
So, you see, common sense and logic sometimes dictate the necessity to keep a loaded weapon handy for self-protection or for the safety of one's family.
For those who have lost a loved one at the hands of a person using a stolen gun, I have the deepest sympathy. But stop pointing the finger of blame at the gun owner. Guns used in such crimes could well have been stolen from a pawnshop, a gunsmith or from a home where it was in a locked cabinet and also had a trigger lock on it.
Curtis wrote, "For one thing, gun owners don't have to register firearms, meaning the number of privately owned guns in the state is unknown." So what? What business is it of the state, and how would registration prevent guns from being stolen?
I guess a person before stealing a gun to rob or murder says, "Oh, perhaps I shouldn't steal this -- it might be registered." Aren't there enough laws on the books? Does a law have to be passed to dictate to law-abiding citizens how they're to maintain their guns?
I suspect many others would have reacted similarly to me in a potentially life-threatening situation. A law requiring a homeowner's gun to be locked and unloaded at all times would place the "bad guys" at a distinct advantage. What benefit is the right to own a gun if restrictions render them useless in an emergency?
Ronald J. Sonnenberg lives in Grand Island
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/orl-edpmyword18071802jul18.story?coll=orl-opinion-headlines
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Comments
SUBMARINE SAILOR,TRUCK DRIVER,RUSTY WALLACE FAN AND AS EVERYONE SO OFTEN POINTS OUT PISS POOR TYPIST e-mail:WNUNLEY@USIT.NET
Have Gun, will travel