Over at Ideas Change the World All the Time, I saw this interesting post. It discusses the gun control debate in the aftermath of this week's incident, and how Australia handled this matter after a similar-scale incident in 1996. I have to say, I prefer Australia's response.
Rifles and such for hunting are one thing, sidearms for law enforcement officers are another, but I don't see the need for semiautomatic guns for "home protection" or just general civilian use. I'm not opposed to guns, but I think that allowing people to have such powerful weapons for no reason whatsoever is more than a little foolish.
You are right, that is an interesting post, but the gun lobby in this country will do everything in its power to make sure that the debate is deflected away from "access to weapons" and onto "personal responsiblity." I don't see this tragedy making an impact any more than Columbine did. It's unfortunate that we won't see some necessary changes.
ReplyDeleteYes, you're quite right. I, too, doubt that this tragedy will have any more effect on our gun politics than any of the other gun-related tragedies do, but hopefully someday there will be a change in our public's mindset. If enough other countries institute changes, perhaps we eventually will as well (not that we're apt to following others).
ReplyDeleteThanks for stopping by my blog!