Gun Control At School

There is obviously a bunch of talk about guns and the control of them. There are two sides to this issue; advocates for guns, and advocates for gun control. Gun control hasn't done much in the way of curtailing crime to date, and it seems like the frenzied purchasing of guns that has ensued of late is further evidence that demand will always be huge. The fear of losing a right that we already have is ridiculous at best, and paranoid at the worst. If you stop and think about what is going on in Washington, it should be apparent that nothing will really change in the near future. Nothing really changes in Washington with the exception of new taxes.

The two-sided debate has become one-dimensional. The box that the politicians and lobbyists are in is full of old ideas for new problems. The NRA says that we should have armed gaurds at all of our schools. Columbine High School had armed gaurds. In a report from CNN, Senator Feinstein says the goal is to "dry up the supply of these weapons over time" by further restricting assault weapons and high capacity magazines. This law could prove to be as effective as the prohibition of marijuana. It certainly never stopped me. It could also be possible if she could shut down every manufacturer of these weapons, and the factories churning out the bullets for them. Not likely. As far as high capacity magazines go; a potential shooter would simply have to carry more clips in his cargo pants. It doesn't take long to switch one out.

I asked a pawn shop clerk about a pistol the other day, and it had a 17 round clip, and it came with two. That means I could have 36 rounds to fire with a semi-automatic weapon. If it had a ten round clip, I would only have 22 rounds at my disposal. That makes a 14 round difference, which could be solved by simply buying another clip. So scale them down as you will Ms. Feinstein; it won't change anything. A sick person can circumvent any law.

What about the economy? History has shown us that prohibition doesn't work. It actually creates a black market. I'm sure there is a thriving black market already in place. It would seem self destructive for our government to willingly give up millions in tax revenue by creating this inevitable black market.

I propose a system for security that is not based on guns, but one that is based on, well, security. When I worked on huge construction sites, in huge refineries, the security at the gate was very strict. If you drove in to the facility, company vehicle or private, you were subject to searches, identification, and a mirror on a stick to check the undercarriage. They once removed the gas cap on a Brown and Root truck to check for something. I'm not sure what they were looking for, but I'm not in the security business.

If our schools were fenced and gated (many are already), and a simple gaurd shack with an armed security gaurd was installed at the only enterance to the school, the odds of a shooter getting in would surely be diminished. All parents should have numbered decals displayed on their windshields for the sake of expedience, and anyone trying to enter without one should be subject to a search. This is commonplace for routine traffic stops already, so there should be no issue; you only have to look suspicious. This system would be more palatable for most of us who have children in school. I personally do not want men with machine guns standing around my first and second grader. The only place I have ever seen this is at an airport in Hondouras, and on the news coverage of war. This type of security has absolutely no place in the public school system.

No matter who wins this debate, it will amount to nothing more than legislation that no one will remember by the time it is enacted. Banning anything having to do with guns will only expand the market. Have no fear gun owners; they won't take the guns you already own. People who prefer not to own guns; hopefully you will be like the millions who never have a need for one.