Our opinions diverge on gun control
The Louisville Cardinal’s editorial staff has been closely following the national gun debate in recent months. Our publication has come to represent a number of diverse opinions on the topics of gun control, mental health, background checks, and constitutional rights. So varied are these opinions that we present them individually below for our readers, and welcome our readers’ opinions in kind.
“Gun ownership for civilians should be guided by the same standards as those for gun owners in military service. The U.S. military is considered the finest in the world. If this is the case, then civilian regulation could benefit from the same psychological tests, background checks and weapons training. These tests and training methods should be made publicly available to all citizens and funded by those public and private entities, which fund the military. Am I being tongue-in-cheek? Maybe. Should this assertion call to attention a larger question about our country’s relationship with guns? Absolutely.” – Rae Hodge, Editor-in-Chief
“I think that I’m torn on how heavily guns should be controlled in this country because of two factors: One, there are so many gun-related deaths that I truly believe could be prevented if guns weren’t allowed for everyone and two, owning personal guns is a huge reason we haven’t had a war fought on US soil since the Civil War (so my history teachers say).” – Anna Meany, Features Editor
“I am all for gun control without infringing on a citizen’s rights to bear arms. Military type guns and weapons should not be easily accessed by the public.” – Caitlyn Crenshaw, Managing Editor
“Personally, I’m for standing by our constitutional rights. Our country was founded on the idea of freedom and should continue to be operated in a way that represents that. The only way to keep from compromising those rights would be to limit which “arms” everyday citizens are allowed to own and purchase. I don’t think we should have some huge database where every gun is registered, but laws could be put in place for future purchases, such as background checks.” – Tyler Mercer, Opinion Editor
“I am in support of more rigorous permit testing (through a third party, not through the government) in order to own any type of weapon. The government should create regulations and enforce them, but should not create a bureaucratic testing department. I also support stricter laws about the types of firearms that can be sold; I think that everything that is currently on the market should available to anyone—even crazies!—but the more destructive it is in terms of weapon class, the more thoroughly you should be tested to get the required permit. If you want a bazooka or a tank, fine, but we have to make sure you’re qualified.” – Simon Isham, News Editor.