In an effort to progress the conversation on firearms, a goal of mine has been to find a fundamental baseline or common ground that both sides of the debate can substantially agree upon and move forward from. To do that, it is necessary that we first recognize the system we have to work within.
In this conversation we seek a balance, a balance between the rights of the individual and public interest via the enactment of laws that will sufficiently reduce criminal acts, negligence and self-harm to justify the restriction of individual rights. In finding this balance it is important to keep in mind we are limited as to what we can do. With the right to keep and bear arms being incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, the ability of the federal government to restrict the sale or ownership of firearms (especially handguns) is severely limited. Simply put, for mere ownership there are some restrictions that are not available.
One of the results of our laws and form of government is that we have an armed civilian population. An effect of this is that a relatively small sub-set of our population act in a manner that results in the death of and injury to tens of thousands people. These acts naturally separate into four distinct categories; criminal gun use, prohibited person gun acquisition, negligent discharges and self-harm. Criminal gun use and prohibited person gun acquisition are the results of criminal acts, negligent discharges, for the most part, are due in whole or in part, to a lack of vigilance, poor firearm education and training. Self-harm or suicide, regardless of the means, is the result of a myriad of social and psychological factors.
As previously stated, a goal of mine is to find common ground to move forward from and of the above mentioned categories of effects, I believe the one most likely to achieve consensus on is negligent discharges. What is a negligent discharge? Before getting into a definition, it would be beneficial to know how many of these incidents occur. When we look at the CDCs WISQARS Fatal and Non-Fatal injury reports this is what we find for 2013;
Unintentional firearm fatalities 505
Unintentional firearm Non-fatal injuries 16,864
Considering the numbers, I think it would be fair to say that the issue of negligent discharges is something that is worth addressing. So, what is a “negligent discharge”? Without delving into tort law, legalese or liability issues, to me a basic definition of a negligent discharge would be “a careless or unplanned firing of a weapon”.
The most likely proximate causes of negligent discharges are due to a lack of vigilance and poor firearm education and training. How do we go about making a positive impact and change in behavior on people’s apparent lack of a conscious recognition or appreciation of a firearms potential lethal capability?
As with most things there is no single solution, rather we would need to employ a multi-pronged approach combining education, training and legislation. If the goal is to encourage people who chose to own firearms to behave in a more responsible manner, thereby reducing the likelihood of negligent discharges, then it is necessary to provide them with the means to do so. Encouraging people to be responsible, the opposite of being negligent, requires explanation (education), demonstration, practical application (training) and a framework (legislation).
EDUCATION
As a nation we have done much to influence positive behaviors through PSA's like "Take a Bite out of Crime", "Only You can prevent forest fires" "Drink, Drive, go to jail" and "Keep America Beautiful". Why not take a similar approach to promoting firearm safety?
TRAINING
We already have very effective instructional programs on the safe operation of motor vehicles. It would be simple to modify the content to address safe handling, operation and storage of firearms. Additionally the development and implementation of nationalized standards for carry permits much like the national standards we have for vehicle operation would go far in promoting safety.
LEGISLATION
We have laws in place to deal with and punish those whose behavior has been found to be negligent. How difficult would it be to enact a zero tolerance policy regarding criminally negligent discharges?
Negligent discharges are the result of a failure to safely own, operate and handle firearms. If our goal is to reduce negligent discharges then it is axiomatic that we promote firearm safety, that we enable people with knowledge and tools, and provide clear expectations of what it means to safely exercise the right of gun ownership.