Friday , August 03, 2012 - 2:25 PM
"Guns don’t kill people, people kill people." This bumper-sticker rhetoric has been the mantra of the NRA gun crowd for decades. Simply stating — grenades don’t kill people, people kill people exposes this simple-minded logic.
It is clear that the statement in the Second Amendment, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." has been restricted.
In America, the right of the people to keep and bear a grenade, or a bazooka, or a nuclear arm is against the law.
The Supreme Court has blocked the ability of the people to own "arms" like grenades, bazookas, nuclear weapons and so forth. I want to ask you, where would you draw the line? Do you think citizens have a practical need to own assault rifles, semiautomatic magazines capable of holding 20, 50, or 100 bullets?
I simply want to ask the NRA to clearly state where they draw the line? I don’t think assault rifles, capable of holding any more than 10 bullet magazines, are necessary or practical. If you can’t hit your target with 10 rounds, maybe you should take up track and learn to run faster.
If a car manufacturer, like Ford or a drug company like Johnson & Johnson, produce a dangerous car or drug, the result of which injures or kills people, legal action quickly follows. We clearly recognize the liability created when bad drugs are produced or unsafe automobiles are manufactured. When over 31,000 Americans are killed with firearms each year, does the NRA have any liability or even a sense of remorse?
The Center for Disease Control’s most current annual data points out that 31,347 people in America were killed with a firearm. Put the current emotion created by the recent shooting in the movie theater in Aurora, Colo., aside for a moment and focus on the reality that over 31,000 Americans are killed each year in the United States with firearms.
Think for a moment that in the full eight years of the War in Iraq, 4,484 U.S. military personnel were killed. Clearly recognize that six times more people are killed with firearms each year in America than the number of soldiers killed during the entire eight years we were at war in Iraq.
Thirty-one thousand people are killed with firearms each year in the United States and both presidential candidates choose to ignore this issue. In the last presidential election there was substantial political discussion about getting out of Iraq.
The loss of American treasure — lives of our military personnel — was paramount. We will lose more than 31,000 citizens this year to firearms in America and both presidential candidates are afraid of the NRA’s power.
This is an embarrassing epitaph of political courage on a national stage
The accidental firearm death of a two-year-old child this past month in Layton emphasizes the consequences of unfounded fear.
Creating fear of unknown criminals is the NRA’s bread and butter. The NRA encourages citizens to be armed for their protection when in reality most firearm deaths are accidents, suicides, and murders that occur between family members and friends.
Stranger-to-stranger murders are few and far between, yet the NRA encourages people to be armed for self-protection. Does the NRA have any liability for giving bad advice?
If your doctor advised you to take up smoking to cure a chronic cough and you die from lung cancer, would your family take legal action?
Thirty-one thousand Americans that will pay the ultimate price for our commitment to the Second Amendment, while the NRA forces our presidential candidates to maintain an ostrich mentality and stick their collective heads in the sand.
Dr. Robert Wadman is a professor, emeritus, Criminal Justice Department, at Weber State University