In April of this year, Brian “Brainless” Kemp signed into law the bill that made it possible for darn near anyone to carry a firearm on their person. Now, supposedly, they are still supposed to get a background check done, but we all know that “private sales” do not have that restriction. That’s a problem because if your neighbor has one that your other neighbor wants to buy, but he has a felony or a TPR because he’s been stalking his girlfriend or ex-wife, there is nothing to stop him from still buying that gun. OOPS.
And that’s just one of the problems. Another is the “straw man”. How does this work? Somebody with a clean record goes in and buys the weapons wanted. He/she will pass the background checks. The weapons arrive, and the straw man picks them up. Then the straw man alerts the customers who wanted the weapons and sells them privately without background checks. Commonly, these people have problem passing the background checks for various reasons: criminal records, DV, mental records, age restrictions, probation, going across state lines, etc. Here’s the hitch: the straw man’s purchase is LEGAL. It is a grey area about the sales to his customers. If he KNOWS about their reasons for not going to a gun dealer, he may have problems. But proving that can be difficult.
I know that regulating private sales would be impossible. That’s a given.
We have work to do on this. That’s for doggone sure. But, to me, making it EASIER for criminals and knuckleheads to walk around with these things under their shirts, hidden in their pants, in their jacket pockets, or in their purses in the case of females, actually ENDANGERS the public, but most importantly, law enforcement. You would think, but you’d be wrong, that somebody who had worked in law enforcement would see that as a problem. Not that guy from Cataula, no, he did not.
Instead, he sponsored it. Now, to remind you of a couple of things, he formerly was in the Muscogee Sheriff’s Department, rose to the rank of Captain before leaving after 30 years, did a bunch of other things, owns his own security company, TEACHES security, and has been President of the Fraternal Order of Police (no idea if that’s current or not).
Now I’m not going to argue the merits of whether or not you, as a citizen, have the Constitutional 2nd Amendment Right to tote a gun around. You do. That’s a fact. My problem is with those folks who SHOULDN’T have their hands on guns and I’d bet money that you’d list the same categories of people that I would.
- Violent criminals
- Domestic abusers
- People with certain mental illnesses (schizophrenics-paranoid type, Bipolar, etc.)
- Young people under 21
- People with PTSD (note that this does not solely apply to veterans)
Yes, I own guns and I can use one with a degree of proficiency. I do not claim to be any kind of a marksman, but I’m not bad either. I’m not afraid to pick one up. Before somebody asks, I have drawn down on an intruder before. So do not think this elderly liberal is totally rabid about gun control. I’m not. I want gun SAFETY. That’s the difference between the far right and the left.
That is why I’m mystified why anyone would want a law that makes it so that every law enforcement officer (police, sheriff deputy, ranger, warden, marshal, agent, detective, investigator, inspector, or whatever) now has to look at every single civilian as being strapped and ready to shoot back with lethal force. It’s insane. I don’t feel safer. In fact, I feel LESS SAFE. Why? Because anyone pulling out a personal weapon has probably never trained to fire under pressure, under stress, or to check their background with potentially other civilians at risk.
- What happens when they MISS?
- What about those collateral damage victims?
- Whose liability bears the burden of the cost of medical bills, trauma, burial expenses, loss of work, emotional distress, etc? The actual shooter? The perp? The government of the city/county/state? Somebody has to foot those bills.
- What about THEIR PTSD when they have to deal with the mental distress of having killed another human being? Not everyone can cope with that.
- Who is going to run around collecting all the guns used at any one event and test them for who shot who when? That’s just more work for forensics. Expensive work for them. And as gun lovers are fond of pointing out, criminals love to toss guns.
Frankly, I’ve taken to staying out of open places with crowds. I don’t know who is carrying and who isn’t, and, since I no longer have any degree of reliable certainty that if somebody IS carrying that they’ve been backgrounded, I’d just rather not be there. I feel like a sitting duck. If that offends you, you’re just going to have to be offended. I’m not comfortable.
Let’s get this right. Trying to arm every citizen like we are the ones fighting the Russians door-to-door ourselves is just wrongheaded. This is NOT the Wild West, Ukraine, or anything close to that. Drug gangs are NOT on every corner. We need a far more rational answer to this and one that is much SAFER for all concerned. One that does not imperil our law enforcement, our citizens, but most importantly, our children.
Please feel free to share with friends, family, and colleagues. We need to have more open and frank conversations about gun safety. This is NOT about the 2nd Amendment. It is about the safety of our communities. This is not Ukraine where they are literally fighting door-to-door with the Russians, nor is it the mythical Wild West with banditos or the savages coming after the settlers. We need rational solutions to these problems for the safety of all concerned, but especially for our children. I did nuclear safety drills in schools. They’re doing active shooter drills for DOMESTIC TERRORISTS. This has to stop.
I am endorsed by Moms Demand Action/Everytown for Gun Safety.
Wright4Georgia 