stepoutoftheboxdotcom

People say that having a gun pointed at you is the most terrifying experience. Never will society comprehend the terror that twenty innocent six and seven-year old children in Newtown, Connecticut experienced when they were slaughtered by a Glock 9-MM, a Sig Sauer 9-MM and a Bushmaster.223-Caliber Assault Rifle shooting five bullets a second. One bullet would have easily killed a child – multiple shots are maniacal. Society gets the argument that Adam Lanza did the killing and not the guns. He could have used a bomb, a knife, or whatever. But his mother owned the assault weapons that were accessible to him. Assuredly, when Nancy Lanza legally purchased these weapons she was not concerned that they would cause her own death, the death of her son, Adam, and the death of twenty-six innocent people. But what did she need these particular guns for? Would not one gun have provided protection?

Gun enthusiasts are vigilant about their Second Amendment right to purchase whatever type of guns they want. They want what they want. It would seem that by now, with twenty-six names added to the roster of others in this country who have succumbed to their death at the hands of these maniacal mass murderers that society’s majority overrules the minority and has to say, guess what, the Second Amendment does not entitle a non-military person to store weapons of mass destruction in his or her home.

Let’s make this argument ridiculously simplistic. If I am stuck in traffic, it would be nice to open a bottle of wine and have a glass or two while I wait it out. I’m not an alcoholic, in fact, I rarely drink. I am a very responsible person who could safely drink while stuck in traffic and then proceed to drive safely when traffic lets up. But there is a law that prohibits drinking and driving that’s designed to protect society. Unless I choose to break the law, I can’t have a glass of wine while I am operating a motor vehicle, no matter how much I want it or feel entitled to it. The law does not prohibit me from drinking – just not when I am driving a car. Or how about the sixteen-year-old who wants to purchase a pack of cigarettes. Guess what? He or she can’t! That person has the right to smoke and most likely will find a way to get cigarettes, but not by purchasing them legally. A person might want to drive a car but lacks driving training and documentation. Guess what? He or she will not be given a license to drive! It does not mean they he or she won’t drive anyway, but not legally.

There are people who will break the law because they want something as there are people who won’t break the law who realize they can’t have everything that they want. Adam Lanza had a mission and it would be naive to think that gun control would have prevented him from carrying out his mission. But maybe gun control, by means of outlawing possession of mass destruction, the kind of legal guns found in his mother’s home, would have prevented his choice of arsenal and lessened the inconceivable suffering of those twenty innocent children who succumbed unmercifully to multiple bullets ripping through their tiny bodies. Isn’t that reason enough?

(c) 2012 Linda Stone Cohen All Rights Reserved

Remember that no amount of money can purchase grace, wisdom and humility.