So the ideas of Gun Control surfaced this week as I got the 1999 email forward of Darrell Scott's address to the US Congress wherein he postulated that gun violence in schools- his daughter was killed in the Columbine shooting - was because prayer was not part of the curriculum and that restrictive Laws were not the answer. Also this week as I was stuck in a waiting lounge of an airport for a ridiculous length of time and forced to watch the nauseatingly chirpy CNN for much too long, covering the funeral of an Iraqi vet/SEAL who was gunned down on a shooting range by another traumatised war vet. I had read an article in a Californian newspaper who portrayed him as a redneck killer who disdained gun control but in fact a quick perusal of the reviews of his book on Amazon revealed that the man was actually quite brave to be in a combat situation and having to follow rules - however like the californian paper says, he comes across as an ignoramus glorying in killing the 'savages'- so no great loss to humanity that he died misguidedly substituting letting out a few rounds on a shooting range for therapy although I have been informed by a hunter guy that it is therapeutic to kill things and fire a gun.
So at what point do we/should we impinge on the rights of others to bear guns? In my opinion, like making children and driving cars - it appears that the least capable/able are the most prolific although academic benchmarks are not the necessarily the best way to go. Maybe with the advent of the Internet, psychological tests should be carried out and clearance given before before either course of action is taken but it does sound like too much like 1984 or Brave New World - who gets to decide?