What I Would Do If I Were Queen of Firearm Reform

I am in education, not because of the fantastic pay; there is none. I am in education because I believe it to be the one sole solution to most of life's challenges.

As the gun discussions grow, twist and turn to address gun violence in the U.S. it becomes more convoluted and fuzzy.  My humble opinion is that too many of the outspoken stakeholders on all sides are repeating information that was fed to them and not listening to the other views.  Everyone needs an education.

There was thought to be a ban on government funded research on the how our gun policies play on the decrease or increase of gun violence. That has now been clarified and, again, money will be released to answer key questions on the effects of our gun policies.  

Now our job is to educate stakeholders on how to use the research to really step back and understand what is happening.

The first thing we teach students who are preparing for a debate is to learn everything they can about the opposing opinion.  The next is to listen carefully to the opponents when they present their side to understand their logic.   This makes for a better debate that is a discussion leading to solutions, not a screaming match of who can get the last word in.

It seems as if we need all of the gun debaters to follow these guidelines.   The current debate has become so far reaching and dramatized  that few debaters have thought the argument through or listened to the other side.  In fact, I see that sometimes both sides really haven't thought through their own arguments or listened to their what they are saying.

Therefore, I will solve the problem for everyone.

1.  The debaters for the firearm advocates should be competitors in gun sports, local gun clubs, hunters, safety and tactical trainers, gun ranges, collectors, investors and criminal justice professionals.  They understand the importance of gun safety which means educating people on how to safely handle and store firearms, maintain them and use them safely.

2.  The debaters for those that want to restrict access to all firearms should be competitors in gun sports, local gun clubs, hunters, safety and tactical trainers, gun ranges, collectors, investors and criminal justice professionals.   These are people that interact with guns and people who use them as sport, investments and collections on a daily basis.   They understand the importance of gun safety which means educating people on how to safely handle and store firearms, maintain them and use them safely.

What I am pointing out here is that this debate should be conducted by the people who are the most educated about gun safety, understand the financial and recreational  benefits and have first hand knowledge of the responsibilities and consequences of firearm ownership.

Let me provide two examples:

Pro - "I want to protect myself and my family".  Unfortunately, too many people purchase a firearm, shoot it once or twice, and then put it fully loaded in a drawer, a glove compartment or tuck it into their belt.  Too many have had no training, are not familiar with the firearm, don't maintain it properly and have no idea of the impact to property and people if they managed to fire a shot.  This article, 7 Biggest Mistakes Concealed Carry Holders Make, goes into what you need to do to protect yourself.


Con - "What would anyone want an AK or AR for?"  First and foremost, they have never fired an AK or AR otherwise they would not ask that question.   The AK and AR are popular firearms; they are not "assault" firearms.  The AK and AR are used in war, but so is every other type of firearm. They are the most visible because they are so cool looking but also effective and practical.  They are not generally used for hunting and certainly a hunter would not empty a 30 round mag into the forest trying to hit a deer.   AKs and ARs are most popular for competitions, target shooting and investments.  They are also used as family fun.

The gun debate should be fueled by real facts and statistics.  This is where we need to educate students again on how to read and evaluate statistics, without biased comments from the sensational entertainment news.    When we teach how to evaluate a research paper, we caution students from gathering information that only proves their point, they have not investigated the validity and comes from authentic research. 

Yep, I am happy to be in a profession that can make a difference.  But I still hate Mondays!