Story 2: Banning Handguns

Date: 2015-10-07; view: 398.

FACTS: In a close vote at a City Council meeting in your community last night, the members voted 4 to 3 to ban the sale and possession of handguns, except by law enforcement officers and by those persons holding a permit issued by the chief of police. The law goes into effect on Jan. 1 of next year, and those persons now possessing handguns will, according to the law, have to dispose of them by that time. First-time violators of the law will face a fine of $50 to $500. A second offense carries maximum penalties of up to six months in jail or a fine of up to $500, or both.

ONE SIDE:Councilman Luis Ramirez, who spoke and voted in favor of the law, said during last night's meeting: “There's no question, the law is valid and doesn't infringe on an individual's constitutional rights. We recognize the deep-seated convictions of a number of persons that they should be permitted to possess handguns for the purpose of protecting themselves and their families and property. But in this case the public interest outweighs the claim of personal interests. We're adopting this law for the overall good of the entire city, to help protect all its citizens from the careless and lawless use of handguns. I'm sure that hundreds of other cities are going to follow our example and consider similar measures. If they do, a lot of lives could be saved. There's no sense to the current slaughter. People can't use handguns to hunt with. Their only purpose is to shoot people. They're used mostly by criminals and, in this city alone, we have 8 or 10 people killed by guns every year and many more seriously injured. There also are hundreds and hundreds of robberies committed with handguns. This law will help put a stop to that. If people want to hunt, they can still buy a rifle or shotgun, and they can use a rifle or shotgun to protect themselves in their homes if they want. But it's harder for a criminal to conceal a weapon that large when he goes into a grocery store or restaurant with the intention of robbing it.”

THE OTHER SIDE: Margaret Ungarient, an attorney representing the citizens opposed to the ban, said at the meeting: “We plan to appeal. The law infringes on citizens constitutional right to keep and bear arms. It's also a matter of self-defense. Criminals do use some handguns in committing crimes. But that doesn't mean the solution is to take away everyone's gun. Law-abiding citizens would comply with this law, but criminals never would. So the criminals would be the only ones with guns, and everyone else would be at their mercy. The council has, in effect, ruled in favor of a minority element that has for a long time been trying to deny the rights of other individuals. We won't rest until this gets reversed in a court of law. If we have to, we'll take this all the way to the Supreme Court.”