- 10-MINUTE MANAGER: Roberto Pereyra Read More
- THE HOYOS FILE: Changing lanes in a slow-moving race Read More
- Pine close in on title Read More
- Birthday bash fit for a king Read More
- MAVIS BECKLES: Crop Over fever everywhere Read More
- SATURDAY'S CHILD: Tombstone territory Read More
- Marvay still on a high Read More
AS I WRITE this letter, a heated debate is taking place in the United States of America about gun control. This debate (long overdue) was sparked by the horrific event of December 14, 2012, in Newtown, Connecticut. Most Americans that I know sincerely believe that it is their individual right to “bear and keep arms” for their own protection as stated in the second amendment of their constitution. They also contend that “guns do not kill people, it is people who kill other people”. They are right in stating that a gun cannot kill anyone or anything unless and until someone uses said gun to kill someone else, but they seem to be missing a salient point in that argument. The relevant point is that it is far easier and safer for the assailant to shoot someone dead than it is to stab, chop, bash or choke that person to death. It is the prospect of possible reactive violence by the intended victim during a “close combat” attempt at killing that deters the assailant from choosing same, and opting to use a gun instead. That seductive choice seems to demand severe restrictions being placed on a carte blanche availability of guns to any civilian population. Leave the protection of the general populace to those specially trained for that purpose, that is, the relevant protective services.