Siding with the thugs

Published: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 12:07 a.m. MDT
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
It's one of the oldest debates in the book — public health and safety versus personal freedom. Smokers and non-smokers went the rounds over that issue, as have people concerned about the Patriot Act.

Now the National Rifle Association is reading from the same books.

This debate comes down to how much information is too much information for the government. If law enforcement officials can curb violent acts against innocent people by gaining more access to the who, what and where of shady gun purchases, isn't that a good thing?

We think so.

The NRA and various members of Congress differ. And they have won a round.

At the heart of the matter is a wish by local officials to use information gleaned by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to help track gun dealers who have a habit of selling guns to criminals. Statistics show that 60 percent of guns used in crimes come from just 1 percent of dealers. Ferreting out such weasels would seem to be a no-brainer. But Congress, citing fears about privacy issues, killed the notion before it had a chance.

Those who favored information sharing said that killing the measure simply put the cops in handcuffs instead of the bad guys.

Story continues below

We agree there, as well.

Not every new law has to be a slippery slope that erodes basic rights. Sometimes, common sense measures can be put in place without leading to abuses. We feel the fears expressed over shared information were overblown. This isn't about the right to bear arms. It's about the right of citizens to feel safe. Putting gun dealers out of business who cynically traffic in weapons they know will be used to intimidate, injure and kill innocent people shouldn't cause such heartburn.

The NRA is a powerful lobby. In many cases the organization has stood convincingly on principle. But not on this one. This move was simply emblematic of overreaction and unnecessary anxiety. It's fear mongering.

This was a classic debate between public safety and personal freedom. Public safety should have ruled the day. It didn't. And the nation less safe because of it.

Comments

You can be the first to comment on this story.

previousnext

Latest comments

Thanks for 3 good years Paul. The Jazz gave you the chance to earn this phat...

Sweet! Don't the Dem's realize that when you crush the rich, there will be...

I want to know who said Mike did all of this? There are no facts or proof to...

Another difference is the U actually BEATS their ranked and BCS opponents....

Mormon myths mostly harmless but unnecessary

I too am glad that McKay Coppins has decided to put the whole "marriage...

BYU and Utah commentators, Can't we all just get along? Both schools are...

Mormon myths mostly harmless but unnecessary

Whereas many of the "faith-promoting" stories that circulate in Mormon...

Thanks for the clarification. (For the record, I knew you weren't a full-time...

REgardless if anyone lied, if in actuality there were any lies, Obama,...

The BCS is accused, fairly, of at least two things: 1. Keeping the title...

Advertisements