When news broke of the movie theater shooting in Aurora, Col., last Friday morning, you had to know the pro- and anti-firearm forces would unholster their well-worn arguments and make the media rounds.
Sure enough, we were not disappointed. We have heard all these arguments before; we hear them every time there is a horrible incident like this.
The fact is, no amount of planning or preparation is going to prevent some nutjob going off the deep end and taking as many innocent lives as possible with him (it is almost always a him).
We see some merit in the argument that no one needs an assault rifle for hunting, but, sadly, we also see too much merit in the argument that once the government starts chipping away at the Second Amendment, it won’t be long before American’s cherished right to keep and bear arms is whittled down to effectively nothing.
In the last 10 years alone, we have already seen our civil liberties trampled in the rush to protect us from terrorism.
The problem with advocates on both sides of the gun issue is their positions lack nuance and this issue is all about nuance.
In states like Maine, hunting is traditional practice and gun ownership is integral to that. For many Mainers, it wasn’t that long ago when, if you didn’t grow it or shoot it, you didn’t eat.
At the same time, there is a case to be made that private citizens have little need to stockpile military grade weapons.
There should be a line somewhere, but precisely where that line is drawn, and how, we don’t know.
