Sent to KFBK radio after listening to a discussion between the hosts and CA Senator Darrel Steinberg:
Amy and Ed,
I was listening to your show this morning on my way to work when you spoke with Darrell Steinberg. The subject of the horrific events atAurora, Colorado and Oak Creek, Wisconsin came up leading into a discussion on gun control. Everyone is understandably looking for some sort of solution to prevent this type of thing from happening in the future, and the topics of better mental health screening and treatment along with gun control are the standard conversations that occur.
I am a 29 year law enforcement veteran, still serving with an agency just east of Sacramento. I began my career with a large S. California Sheriff’s Office in 1980, then moved my family to N. California for a better quality of life. I am currently the lead trainer and lethal force instructor at my current agency. I only mention this as I want you to understand that I speak from a long time street cop and use of force instructor perspective. I spend much of the training time at our agency training our officers how to respond to these types of incidents.
By and far, the large majority of law enforcement officers do not support the type of gun control that people like Mr. Steinberg would like to enact, regardless of what their chiefs of police might say. It’s a proven fact that in states where there are more concealed weapon carriers that there are less crimes of violence. The facts are there… please don’t take my word for it, do the research yourselves. It has been said that “An armed society is a polite society”. I think everybody would wish that we had evolved beyond the need to be armed and have to defend ourselves, but it is simply not the way of reality. Even one situation like Aurora, the Sikh temple shooting, or a Columbine is one too many, but what Mr. Steinberg proposes will not stop these events from occurring. There is nothing I wish more than I could be at the scene at the moment that some perverted monster decides to make war on innocent civilians so I could do my best to stop them. But the reality is that we are very rarely on scene as horrible things happen.
I agree with some limited registration, which we already have. Most states have the Federal “Insta-check” program in place, where a background can be completed in moments on a firearms purchaser. What Mr.Steinberg was proposing this morning, which you agreed to, was in essence a ban on all semi-automatic firearms (all “clip fed” weapons was what he said). AK-47’s are already illegal without a Federal permit and licensing process as they are fully automatic machine guns. So called “assault rifles” are simply semi-automatic look alike civilian versions of military rifles, and are already heavily regulated. As a peace officer I have no trouble with firearms, including the so-called “assault weapons” in the hands of reasonable, responsible, law abiding citizens.
The argument often put forward by gun-control proponents is that they support the Second Amendment, but that the Founders never envisioned semi-automatic weapons and high capacity magazines. So that means that we should still be relegated to muskets? Fortunately or unfortunately, technology has progressed. That does not mean I think that just anyone should be able to own a belt-fed heavy machine gun without some stringent background checks and a permit process.
When we recognize as a society, that, One: We need to stop spoon feeding media violence to our children, and teach them that there are serious consequences for committing violent acts. Two: We need to improve on our handling of persons with mental health issues, especially those that show some inclination towards acting out their violent fantasies. Three: There are already enough laws on the books, and enough controls. Instead of taking away rights from the rest of us, put some teeth back into the justice system. When a shooter is apprehended committing an act as horrible as the Aurora or Oak Creek shooting, a speedy trial should ensue. If found guilty, one speedy appeal. If the conviction is upheld, their lives are forfeit and they should be immediately destroyed just as we would destroy a rabid hyena.
When there are real deterrents in place and actually being used, we will begin to see a difference. When we actually call things what they are and act instead of being frozen due to “political correctness” then we will see a change. Unfortunately some people only understand brute force or the “big stick”. Those are truisms of human nature, whether some progressive minded folks want to believe it or not. If youcould wave a magic wand and make all the guns disappear, the people that are inclined to will still find some other means to carry out mass murder.
Thank you for your show! You two do a great job and I always enjoy listening to you.
Best,
Steve Morrill