Governing Gun Control - Inspired by "The Hidden Life of Guns"

     The latest installment of the Washington Post series, “The Hidden Life of Guns” came out today, broadening the scope of research to the nationwide effects of gun sales in the deaths of police officers.  Previous articles in the series explore gun sales in the Washington area, gun sale privacy laws and how quickly guns sold by dealers connect to crimes.  The most shocking aspect of this series is that everything that takes place up until the actual crime committed with the gun is protected under the varying and loose state gun laws.

     The Second Amendment states, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”  Gun laws differ from state to state, some taking the Second Amendment more literally than others.  In D.C., it is legal to own a firearm as long as it is registered with the police, since the handgun ban was rendered unconstitutional in 2008.  I think the laws in Washington, as well as other states, do not go far enough in regulating the area’s gun ownership and gun-related crime.

     The Post’s series shows alarming statistics on how easily people who have committed past crimes can get their hands on a gun.  Apart from stealing guns, there are “straw purchases”, in which the person with a criminal record has a girlfriend or relative purchase the gun for them or buys the gun with only a record of misdemeanors instead of felonies.  If it were up to me, gun sales would be illegal no matter what, but since our Constitution states otherwise, I think the laws should tighten up considerably.

     Gun control should be regulated under federal law, and should not be subject to the discretion of the state.  In gun-related crimes, the basic human right to life is at stake, from the lives of police officers to innocent bystanders, and these violations should have uniform regulation and punishment by federal law.  Lax gun-control laws in some states make it possible for people to buy guns and smuggle them into other, stricter states, making some of their regulatory laws difficult to enforce.  Strict laws would be easier to enforce if they were the same nationwide and every state put them into action.

     The series’ article, “How politics protects gun dealers”, discusses the Tiarht amendment and its effects on legal gun sales and crimes.  Under this amendment, information tracing guns used in crimes to gun dealers is confidential, protecting the gun dealers from lawsuits and criticism.  This amendment should be repealed, encouraging gun dealers to exercise more caution and discretion in selling firearms and limiting the instances of straw purchases.  The amendment helps these businesses stay afloat and make some sort of a profit, but at what cost does this profit come?

     Gun control is a difficult issue due to the varying values and opinions tied to it.  Some people think it necessary to own a gun for self-protection or protection of loved ones as well as occupational requirements.  I realize it is almost impossible to create federal gun regulations and stricter gun sale standards, but I strongly encourage anyone interested in the issue to read the series and consider the cost of our current gun control situation.

     

DC Urban Moms: From Advice to Gossip

     This week, Washington City Paper published an online article about Sidwell Friends’ football team.  It discussed our somewhat disappointing record and the possible causing factors.  However, what stood out to me most, aside from the incorrect facts and insertion of opinion in a news article, were the references made to the website DC Urban Moms.  On the site, a whole discussion board had been dedicated to the topic of Sidwell football, spanning a total of 33 pages.

     I had never heard of the website before this week’s article, and had no idea parents discussed high school sports in such depth online.  I looked at the site a bit more and its purpose was not so surprising anymore.  DC Urban Moms was initially created in 2001 as an advice forum for parents in D.C. on absolutely everything from finding toys for their children to help in the high school admissions process.  It is a community of over 5,000 members who can discuss and support each other on common issues of parenting in the D.C. area.

     But, there is a flipside to this type of online community.  Just as in any community, news can turn into gossip quickly, and with the added bonus of anonymous posts, it gets ugly fast.  Topics such as “What’s the Most Obnoxious Thing You’ve Heard a Parent Say at Your DC’s Private School?” and “Where Do Douchebags Send Their Children?” just beg for online drama.  I have yet to meet a parent who would post on this site in discussions such as these, but the fact that there are parents who do is a little troublesome.  There are plenty of websites where kids have these types of discussions, like Juicy Campus or Campus Dirt, but aren’t parents supposed to be a little more mature than their kids?

     There is no question the internet changed how most communities function.  It now provides new forms of communication, information and organization that were not available 10 years ago.  But, with this evolution of communities and the new cloak of anonymity, members need to keep in mind the purpose of that community.  Asking for and giving advice is a great way to create a strong community, but using it to discuss a high school football team’s off season or the reputations of certain schools causes that community to lose a certain credibility.  Parents, along with everyone else, are bound to gossip and talk about their kids at parties or on the sidelines, but bringing it to such a public platform as the internet may not be the most sensible idea in the world.