The responsibilities of the gun culture

There can be nothing more grotesque than the slaughter of school children.

The nation has recoiled in revulsion at the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. Nobody wants to see this happen again ... and again and again and again. So the national dialogue turns to gun control. Some want a ban on "assault weapons" while gun-rights advocates argue that a ban is cosmetic, ineffective or actually counterproductive. Some come at this issue with entrenched ideological positions; others plead for "common sense."

In the midst of all this, America's gun culture needs to take a good hard look at itself.

I am part of that gun culture. I have owned firearms since my early teens. My firearms use is for sporting purposes, but I have had occasion to wield a firearm in self-defense (thankfully, no shots fired). The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution recognizes an individual right to keep and bear arms. There is also a clause that includes the words "well-regulated."

It's time for effective licensing of firearms owners (some states already have licensing provisions). That's unwelcome to many in the gun culture, who fear that it is the camel's nose in the tent toward more severe ownership restriction or outright gun confiscation. I don't think so. Firearms licensing can be implemented as an extension of hunter safety and concealed carry programs, with the active participation of organizations including the NRA, which has excellent instructor certification programs.

Perhaps "assault weapons" should fall under a separate, more rigorous licensing tier.

Making the process of acquiring a firearm more serious across the nation would not prevent all gun crime, and it would not deter a disturbed individual from attempting mass slaughter. But it would create an opportunity for red flags to pop up, a window for intervention. And it could instill a more focused culture of responsibility in the gun world.

Yes, more regulation is onerous for those of us who already take our responsibilities seriously. But I'm willing to put up with some hassle I don't need to have more assurance that the guy who shows up next to me on the range has some basic level of competence. And regulating the user is more to the point than banning certain classifications of firearms, an exercise that has often been merely cosmetic and of marginal effectiveness.

I worked in the gun business, during and after the Rodney King riots. It was an intense time. The shop where I worked refused to sell to people we knew would buy a gun for "protection" and never learn how to use it safely and properly. We didn't want to arm people who would be a menace to themselves and their loved ones.

An appropriate licensing procedure would likely deter at least some of those types, and give an opportunity to flag others for further review. A quick criminal background check just isn't enough.

Real training and education would be a good thing overall, instilling safety, skill and a level of respect for the potentially deadly weapon you are keeping in your home, your vehicle, on your person.

There are many factors that contribute to mass killings - a mental health crisis and significant civic breakdown being primary among them. But we can't pretend that there's not something especially toxic in the combination of a disturbed young man and a lethal weapon. We know we have to separate drunk people from the car keys - and we've reduced drunk driving without banning either alcohol or cars.

Those of us who value our gun rights, our heritage, and our sport can't just stick our heads in the sand and accept the status quo. We can reduce violence. The gun culture can be part of the solution.