Background Checks No Big Deal? Maybe Not So Much

I used to think that background checks -- while important -- were a weak deterrent to gun sales and a sad culmination of all the anguished lobbying in Washington after Newtown.

But reading in The New York Times today, I was shocked to see how much gun violence they could possibly prevent.  I realize "possibly" is the operative word here.

But The Times gave as an example a felon (who would not legally be able to purchase a gun through legitimate means) who advertised for one on armslist.com, and each day, his request grew more and more desperate.  Looking like a crime in need of a weapon.

This felon was convicted of  burglary and domestic violence. And now, to hear that Republicans, once again, are caving in to the gun lobby, or at least, saying they will probably not vote for this most miniscule (in the end) legislation, I feel despair and rage.

While you can't really connect the Boston Marathon bombings and disasters like Newtown, you can see the connection between the Internet and people with malevolence on their minds.  You can get bomb assembly instructions and buy ingredients, not just guns, just like that, according to the story.

But shouldn't that make us want to tighten our laws even more?  How many more Boston Marathons do we want?

And as for the argument that people will get their hands on death-making devices anyway, I say, let's do what we can.  I can't really make sense of walking away from legs blown off and shrapnel embedded in brains, multiple bullets shredding children's bodies,  because, hey, it's just going to happen again.













http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/17/us/seeking-gun-or-selling-one-web-is-a-land-of-few-rules.html?pagewanted=all


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Who does Donald Trump Really Hate? Himself.

Did You Know Emojis Could Do THAT?

Is It Better to Wait?