Being a Better Republican: My New Year's Resolution for 2024

Reframing the Gun Issue

It's become a reality we're all too familiar with: A madman (or woman) develops some sickness in the head for whatever reason, shows all the signs of being capable of doing a tragedy, often even SAYING they will do it, but are able to buy a gun legally and go to a school or church and mow down dozens of innocent children.

It goes without saying that we MUST put a stop to this problem immediately.

But taking away the fundamental right of the people to keep and bear arms is not the way to go about it.

People are the problem, not the gun.

I recall a Life Dynamics podcast from a year or two ago, shortly after the massacre at Uvalde, where late, great pro-life advocate Mark Crutcher visited a historic school in his hometown of Denton, Texas. He was surprised to see an old photo with rifles hanging on the walls. These guns were, as unbelievable as it may seem to modern Americans, the property of the students. Grade. School. Students. The reason was simple: if you lived in a rural area in the early 1900s or late 1800s where wild animals could and did devour kids in one bite and Indian tribes who speared first and asked questions later, you sent them to school with a gun. Kids have always had access to guns. 

So what changed between then and now? The answer is simple: We stopped committing the mentally deranged to insane asylums and we stopped punishing bad behavior.

Yeah, it really is that simple.

Let's say that in 1975, Nikolas Cruz had been around and shown all the same signs of being mentally disturbed as he did in 2018 and before in real life. You know, explosive behavior, sexual acting out, fantasizing about guns and violence, all that. He would have been severely punished for this behavior (even hit with a paddle), and if that didn't work, he'd be put away in Florida State Hospital for the Insane, and he'd still be there unless doctors or his pastor found a way to fix him. In that era, you behaved yourself and kept your sickness hidden, or you went away.

In and before 2018, however, police were called to Nikolas Cruz's house dozens of times for domestic violence against family members, and nothing was done. You could argue that these instances were a result of mental disability. But that doesn't mean you leave him out in the community. Bring him to an asylum and keep him there unless the doctors or his pastor can find a way to fix him.

Also, any school shooting threat should be taken seriously. Treat the person who makes such a threat the same as if they showed up to the front door with a gun unless you can prove it was just adolescent venting and not a credible threat. This includes threats made on social media, from one kid to another, and especially if that person or a family member owns a gun.

Medication is a huge advancement in the field of mental health. I take three mental health medications myself every day, and they've allowed me to have a much more trouble-free life than I would have otherwise. But medication only works if the person takes them as prescribed, first of all, and no medication is foolproof. If people make a threat to cause a tragedy, they need to be put away until doctors can find a medication, therapy regimen, or religious practice that can fix them.

I understand the impulse against putting the mentally ill in prison, one hundred percent. But we can't just have them out in the community. That's what mental institutions are for. If we're not putting them in a psych ward, we have no choice but to wait until they kill children, then put them in prison. And a mass shooter does belong in prison, full stop. I don't care if they're mentally ill. Unless you can prove they did not understand right or wrong (unlikely), in which case you institutionalize them for life, society MUST put them in prison or execute them.

Notice you did not see me call for a single gun restriction so far. That's because none are needed if we get back to punishing bad behavior and institutionalizing those whom medication can't help. That said, background checks do need to be universal. Anyone should be able to do them. You should just be able to enter a person's name into a database, and if any violent felonies, recent mental health episodes, etc. show up, you do not sell that person a firearm. Background checks won't catch every basket case, of course. That's where psychiatrists, psychologists, and doctors come in. If they believe a patient seeing them is too dangerous to own a gun, they should be able to file a petition to a court to bar that person from purchasing a gun. This should, of course, be open to a court challenge, and if the person shows good moral character and no violent impulses are able to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, they should be given the benefit of the doubt. Also, this should not result in confiscation of weapons the person already owns unless a direct threat (like, "I am going to kill myself" or "I'm gonna kill kids") is made. I must emphasize that trained medical professionals who are familiar with the person as a patient should be the ONLY ones able to file such a petition. And they should have to have a good reason (like the person suffers from emotional breakdowns).