
Paul Deavereaux (no relation to Claude) sent me this comment which I woiuld like to make the starting point for a discussion on Firearms ownership rights. He lives in California. pl
-------------------------------------------
"Well, in brief, some kind of laws that won't take my guns away from me :-)
As I posted, I currently own three firearms -- a riot shotgun and two antique but nicely maintained .22 rifles -- no handguns at all. Speaking for myself, with my level of training and no official need to carry a handgun any longer, any protection offered by handguns is way offset by the danger to myself and my family. So I got rid of my handguns. And feel good about it. Safer. Which is the point.
As for controls, I think long guns and handguns should be legal but need to be treated a little differently in terms of oversight.
Gun ownership/purchase should be permitted only to those individuals who have completed a proper, certified and rigorous course in their use and their legal liabilities and responsibilities (service in the military does not exempt one from completing the civilian course). There should be individual courses for handguns and long guns. The courses can be administered by gov't agencies or by duly licensed private individuals and groups (NRA etc). Cost for the course should be fixed at a reasonable figure so as to not be prohibitive (used as a 'gateway' to restrict gun ownership to only the affluent).
Recent Comments