Strong Gun Laws? 

click to enlarge

"Mitt Romney Among 10 GOP Senators Backing Gun Safety Proposal." That recent Deseret News headline says it all. But, while people with conscience and empathy are gobsmacked by the disconnect between our legislators and the welfare of the American people, the madness continues.

Utah is just one of many "Red" states that have consistently declined to commit to the issue of reasonable gun-safety laws. We have four congressmen who, somehow, look into the mirror each day without any embarrassment or shame over the blood on the floors of our schools, churches and malls. When they view their reflections, they ought to be weeping. Instead, they smile, as if to affirm that "all is well in Zion."

The truth is that instead of endorsing an assault rifle ban, they're cowards over re-election concerns.

All Utah's legislators, except Sen. Mitt Romney, have failed the grade. But even his highly-vocal support—for red flag laws, better mental health treatment, school security and a heightened level of scrutiny for purchasers under the age of 21—falls pathetically short.

Then there's Sen. Mike Lee, who's anti-gun-control mindset is reprehensible. In the past, he's actually sought to promote legislation prohibiting future passage of restrictive gun laws. He obviously knows where his re-election campaign funds will come from.

And yet, it's really not our legislators' fault—or at least they'll justify themselves with that excuse.

In the backs of their minds, Utah's congressmen must share the delusion that their failure to support new gun control legislation is the actual wish of their constituents, and that their stubborn defiance of more-restrictive gun laws is actually the will of the people. Somehow, they've allowed their brains to be hijacked by an erroneous premise—the tragic notion that most Utahns are OK with all the blood, as long as their Constitutional rights are being defended.

But I'll bet you, there's no parent, sibling or friend who's actually suffered the loss of a loved one at the hands of a madman with an assault rifle who doesn't cry for new legislation to end the madness, once and for all. Why do most GOP lawmakers refuse to consider meaningful and effective gun legislation, even in the wake of numerous mass-shooting tragedies? Virtually all of those senseless killings involved assault-style rifles, military-bred instruments designed not for sporting events, but solely for the purpose of wholesale killing.

Behind each of those guns was a sicko determined to kill. And yes, some of the bipartisan proposals may be helpful in controlling the sale of guns to those who present a probable threat. But our Republican senators—with only ten exceptions (including Mitt Romney)—have stated that they will not vote in favor of greater, meaningful controls on the sale of assault rifles. Nor will they use age, and the incomplete development of adolescent brains, as an intelligent rationale to block kids from the easy purchase of lethal weapons.

I dare say, it's a no brainer. There's probably no 18-year-old—with the typically-underdeveloped prefrontal cortex—who should be able to drop into the local sporting goods store and buy an assault rifle. Sadly, many of the mass shootings have started out just that way.

How can anyone argue with that? Sure, these young perpetrators were disturbed and emotionally unsound, but no kid that age—even one who survives the scrutiny of a mental health assessment—should be able to make such a purchase. We have plenty of laws that discriminate—and rightly so—on the basis of age. An 18-year-old can't buy a beer for another three years. That's the law. But assault rifles? The GOP has dug-in its heels on new restrictions based on age.

The headstones should be all the proof we need, and yet, the GOP has sworn that new, age-based purchase laws are not on the table. I'm worried that the consideration of new gun laws, and the pat-us-on-the-back, loudly-heralded bipartisan push for better regulations, are simply a repetitive dog-and-pony-show giving Americans a false hope that something new is really about to happen. But it's not going to be anything new—just more of the same senseless killings that appear so predictably, and regularly, on the front pages and TV screens of America.I think the long delay—the idea that there "may be something" by the end of July—is a harbinger of just more of the same anemic, ineffective legislation that fails to address the most important issue. No matter what our legislators say, those guns are a hefty part of the equation. We don't need assault rifles in our communities

Sadly, the senseless killings will continue. Each will be followed by (a) the loud outcry of Americans, (b) new commitment to get effective legislation, (c) reverent words and lofty-sounding prayers about the innocent dead, (d) more demonstrations and marches to show our congressmen and senators that we're fed-up.I hate to say it, but I'm not optimistic about any help on the horizon. This is very much about guns. But even more important, it's about a failure of the American system to restrict our politicians from accepting unlimited black-money as "campaign contributions" and, in so doing, risking the lives and welfare of all Americans.

The author is a retired businessman, novelist, columnist, and former Vietnam-era Army assistant public information officer. He lives in Riverton, Utah with his wife, Carol, and the beloved ashes of their mongrel dog.