• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

While our President is preoccupied with Iraq, a sniper is on the loose near the nation’s capital, using a legally attainable weapon to murder innocent victims.

The sniper has killed nine people since October 2, sending a shockwave of fear through suburban Washington and the nation. Stories of moms keeping their kids home from kindergarten and of people being told to duck down while getting gas fill the news.

Anyone would agree that if there were a way to eradicate this fear, it should be done. Then why are so many people in this country resistant to controlling the ownership of the weapons that help people like this sniper carry out acts that are so heinous?

One of the main reasons the sniper has not been caught is that there is no federal database of ballistic fingerprints from guns like the one the sniper is using.

And why hasn’t legislation been approved to put together a database, one that would help in solving and preventing many murders in addition to the sniper case?

Because the NRA has too much influence and has prevented Congress from passing the necessary legislation.

During the 2000 presidential campaign, NRA First Vice President Kayne Robinson made the NRA’s aims clear: “If we (Bush and Cheney) win, we’ll have a president where we work out of their office.”

How is a president with such relations with the NRA supposed to objectively evaluate current legislation before Congress? No wonder Press Secretary Ari Fleischer blatantly dismissed new gun legislation the other day, commenting that the issues are the “morality” and “values” of the killer.

Well of course. If everyone had perfect morality and values, the only problems related to guns would be accidents. But unfortunately, this isn’t a perfect world.

The NRA works hard to make sure guns are available to just about everyone in the country. It pours thousands of dollars into campaigns for people who are sympathetic to its views, knowing that once they are in office, it can exert control over their agenda.

The NRA bases their argument on the Second Amendment to the Constitution, which states “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

There are many different interpretations of this amendment. That’s fine, since the only undisputed answer could come from the founders, who aren’t available for comment.

Isn’t it Bush himself who constantly points out “evil in the world?” We need to accept the truth and try to prevent certain people’s warped attitudes from causing terror and fear in the citizens of this country.

People are always touting the “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” mantra. Even if one believed this, what is the point of stubbornly holding fast to this idea when all it does is create a culture where guns are available to the people who do want to kill? Why not remove the weapons from the equation?

Of course there are no hard and fast ways to ensure complete security from gun violence in America. Our leaders should prove to the public that they are trying prevent people like the sniper from easy access to weapons. Passing legislation to make a ballistic fingerprint database – despite the NRA’s objections – is a good place to start.