Iraq War veteran Christopher Neiweem: US gun control needs a hard reset
Campaigners must stop accusing gun advocates of being responsible for murder, argues Iraq War veteran Christopher Neiweem.
Wednesday 8 November 2017 03:41, UK
Basic framework is missing from the gun debate in America and additional context may dispel the well-intended and yet ineffective campaigns to institute stricter gun control measures in the land of the free.
The recent mass shooting in Sutherland Springs, Texas, has naturally regenerated the debate as gun control advocates are slamming President Trump and implying Republican lawmakers are partially responsible for the ongoing violence related to shootings because the GOP majority in Congress will not pass additional gun control measures.
Liberals seem to believe that gun control measures will eliminate the opportunity for gun crime. They will not.
The left also has no solution for how to control the bureaucratic tidal wave they intend to create to make sure the regulations that are purposed to keep us safe will actually work as intended.
:: Trump: Gun laws would have made Texas shooting worse
The liberal philosophy does not begin with mortality statistics, the quantitative amount of firearms that exist in the nation, or how their recommended policy changes comport with constitutional freedom under the second amendment.
Further, there is no end to the increasing government role liberals want to see in relation to firearms regulation.
The Center for Disease Control (CDC) data cited that in 2014, 11,008 firearm-related fatalities occurred, which is less than four people per 100,000 or 0.003% of the population.
It is my firm belief that the left reacts more strongly to the firearm debate because unfortunately with over 320 million people in this country and hundreds of millions of firearms inevitably these crimes will occur.
Government policy cannot make a certain end to these tragedies.
:: Strength and grace in Sutherland Springs
This moves into a more recently debated topic of the right to carry and how Americans can defend against these shootings.
If you possess a firearm your chances of surviving a shooting are much greater (notwithstanding other factors such as escape routes, environment, training, and range from the shooter).
The most effective way to survive a shooting is one of the following three options: escape, wound the shooter, or kill the shooter - and the last is more feasible with a firearm.
Gun control implementation has been one of the more under-reported factors next to the issue of mental health funding and the extent to which the United States takes on these issues with legislative reforms.
We have state laws and federal laws that are routinely implemented incorrectly or due to bureaucracy do not achieve the intended effect.
:: Vegas gunman had no children, but many guns
For example, in the State of Illinois the General Assembly at one point changed the law so that if a citizen received inpatient mental health treatment (regardless of diagnosis) that citizen would lose their gun rights for five years.
Yet there was no policy with the state police that would allow for confiscation or to ensure current ammunition stockpiles or firearms were taken.
Essentially the citizen would simply not be allowed to purchase future firearms or ammunition as their firearms owner identification card (FOID) would be suspended.
In other words, the policies create hurdles or opportunities to reduce gun violence while ignoring regulatory issues.
The left is very strongly in favour of gun control but does not seem to understand a gun is a tool.
There is no call going on to reduce alcohol permits or drivers licences despite record mortality statistics because the issues have not become so politically charged over time.
Certainly the violence and regulation of firearms deserves examination but in my view to actually achieve results Democrats need to concede many previous gun control efforts have failed and they should propose concessions with Republicans to expand concealed carry in exchange for things like gun buy back programmes to reduce the overall numbers.
Guns exist, and when they are misused the results are horrifying, but the left needs to understand any gun control measure that is proposed needs to comport with the second amendment so the rest of us can reasonably protect ourselves from danger.
This debate needs to start at the beginning with all stakeholders engaged but it cannot begin with accusations that one particular political party is responsible for murder because they do not support the left wing perspective on an issue that has often already proven to fail.
Christopher Neiweem is an Iraq War veteran, President of Neiweem Group LLC, and one of the US's leading military policy analysts. He has served as an expert witness before Congress in both the House and Senate and appeared on dozens national of media platforms. He supports the second amendment and believes the gun control debate in America has become so politicised it needs a hard reset.