I'm licensed for CCW and I carry a gun from time to time. So I'm not opposed per se to the notion that guns do more good than harm. What I do oppose is constructing an argument for either position out of whole cloth.
What was once the "tool" of law enforcement types, the military, and hunters is now the equivalent of an iPhone, a talisman of connection and social order. It's something that just about anyone can put in a pocket, a purse, or simply strap on in the full light of day in a land where all of us seem to be heading for the O.K. Corral.
It has somehow become acceptable to many of my colleagues to simply express condolences and repeat tired excuses for inaction like "we can't legislate away crazy," or "guns don't kill people, people do." Meanwhile, their intransigence allows the violence to continue as the roots of this problem are ignored.
The police force has to act in function of our democracy. The uncooked actions of the police officers constituted an assault on that democracy.
Bears don't wear shirts. To my knowledge, bears don't wear any clothing. So bears run around the woods in the nude. In the cold weather, wouldn't a bear prefer to wear at least a shirt? You can paws for a moment to think about that.
There are certainly many legitimate purposes for firearms in our society, to include recreational shooting, home defense, collectors, etc. But just because something is legitimate doesn't make it wise.
Too often, articles end by ridiculing the gun owners. However, it's far more productive to suggest ways that enable law-abiding gun owners to co-exist in a society not riddled with gun violence.
Whether dealing with close U.S. partners or more distant governments, the United States should have the same principled voice for human rights. 2014 was a decent year for change in U.S. policies towards Latin America and the Caribbean. Let's make 2015 a banner year.
It has been a week since Ismaayl Brinsley, a deranged man with a long criminal record, killed two New York City police officers, Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos, in cold blood, but so far we haven't heard a word from the National Rifle Association.
Are we the nation that will follow the lead of the peaceful protesters, reconsider our values and trumpet a new civil-rights era? Will newly-empowered Republicans support such a thing?
I am humbled by the immediate and quick action from faculty and staff to create safe and honest dialogues on these sensitive, complicated, and deeply rooted issues that require us to look honestly at our core believes and long held stereotypes.
Thirty years ago today the inviolate right to self-defense and the battle over firearm civil liberties were joined in one of the unlikeliest of battle zones -- New York City.
What do you think is more important -- to protect the right of Americans to own guns or to control gun ownership?
The increased demand for more gun rights predates the election of President Barack Obama. Sure gun control support increased as the overall crime rate fell in the 1990s, but also fell as the crime rate continued to decline in the following decade.
In a majority of states, it is completely legal to open carry a loaded gun in public without any training, permitting, or a background check.
We cannot ignore this simple truth: Too many shootings occur because improper weight is given to the risks that come with gun ownership, particularly in homes with children and teens. A gun in the home increases the risk of an unintentional shooting, suicide and homicide.