School Shootings Inspire Calls for Gun Control

The Washington Post’s response to the murders of Amish schoolgirls is a predictable call for more gun control: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/02/AR2006100201197.html?referrer=email.

The editorial writer laments that Congress has failed to make it “harder for the wrong people to get guns”. Certainly, you don’t want to sell guns to someone who intends to use them to murder someone, but there is often no way for a seller to know a buyer’s intent or whether the buyer might some day in the future develop a murderous intent. What if the homicidal maniac who killed those schoolgirls had never shown any previous indication that he might do such a thing? How would gun control measures have helped unless you prohibit firearms altogether?

There has been a flurry of attacks by maniacs on schools lately, and this is a matter of concern. But shootings at schools are still relatively rare, and each of us must consider whether depriving ourselves of the ability to keep and bear arms is too high of a price to pay for slightly enhanced school safety. A disarmed populace is in a very perilous position with respect to the state and other criminals, and the tiny enhancement to school safety would be far outweighed by the loss of the ability to defend ourselves and the reduction of freedom.

Moreover, I don’t reckon that my freedom of action should be restricted based on what the craziest or most irresponsible person in the world might do. Tens of thousands die in automobile accidents each year. Should we prohibit automobiles or enact measures to make it “harder for the wrong people” to get cars? Some pedophiles cruise chat rooms and try to make dates with kids. Should we prohibit chat rooms or make access by the “wrong people” more difficult?

We don’t usually know who the “wrong people” are until they do something wrong. We are all potentially the wrong people, and we are all the wrong people in someone’s eyes.