Here comes the weekend

(Hum Dave Edmunds to yourself, everyone ...)

It's Friday - yippee. I've not done much today. Read a little ... and that's about it. So much for my list of things to do. I am home full time, and I got more done when I had a job and my kids had multiple activities. Sigh.

I've read all the op-eds this week on gun control, no gun control. Ted Nugent seems to think if we all carried concealed weapons none of these mass shootings would happen. Sure - let's return to a vigilante society. That way, every time someone is mad or loses their temper, they can whip out a gun and shoot the object of their wrath. That will make everything all better.

Others suggest that we went too far in the '60s liberalizing laws with the mentally ill and commitment procedures. But I'm not a big fan of the involuntary commitment days, when a family member with questionable intentions could have someone committed. Do we really need to go there? Yes, this kid at VaTech had problems. But what about someone who, for whatever reason, has raised the ire of family members - a spouse who wants custody, a *radical* teen who won't tow the family line, do as they're told? People who aren't truly mentally ill, but who are deemed as trouble makers? Makes me nervous.

And why do these mass shootings seem to occur more often than not in the USA? Other countries tighten gun laws when this happens. Why do people need handguns anyway? Don't go all second amendment on me - read the words. "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." This is not about handguns. I wouldn't suggest taking hunting weapons away - I don't get it, but hey, it's a sport, and I can accept that. But handguns? The evidence does not support the NRA's suggestion that people successfully use handguns to prevent crimes. From Time magazine:

"There is far more research on the question of who is most likely to get killed when someone keeps a gun at home. In a 1986 study called 'Protection or Peril?,' Dr. Arthur Kellermann, a University of Tennessee professor of medicine, and Dr. Donald Reay, chief medical examiner of King County in Washington, concluded that for each defensive, justifiable homicide there were 43 murders, suicides or accidental deaths. Out of 398 gunshot fatalities in homes in King County between 1978 and 1983, only nine were motivated by self- defense ... The one-week survey by TIME found a similar ratio on a national basis: only 14 of the 464 gun deaths resulted from defensive firing. An alarming 216 were suicides, 22 were accidental, and many of the rest involved homicides among people who knew each other well rather than citizens gunned down by strangers."

It all depends, of course, on who collects and analyzes the data - do a quick search and you'll find plenty of evidence by pro-handgun groups that will dispute these assertions.

No easy answers. I just can't see that having easy access to guns is helping anyone, ever. Ask those families at VaTech; I'm guessing they might agree.