Drug use and other factors

While the debate heats up as to the existing gun laws of the country and who should be given the permit to carry their firearms out of their residences, aside from gun ownership itself, another factor that for sure contributed to Ronald Bae’s deadly shooting spree is his drug use. As confirmed by his estranged wife, he was indeed a drug user. He was also arrested for a shooting incident. So the questions beg to be asked. Why was a person with a history of drug use and shooting allowed to continue to own a firearm? According th the PNP, the gun he used was a “loose firearm”. Which means that the PNP knew he had one, right? If he was already arrested for a shooting incident, why does he still own not one, but two guns?

The PNP has always trumpeted its enforcement of strict screening of persons wanting to own guns, especially those who want permits to carry them outside their residences. But clearly that process has failed dismally in the case of Ronald Bae. If he was okay when he applied for his licenses, that all changed when he started to use drugs! And the PNP should have done something right there. With his drug use, being separated from his wife and losing in his electoral bid last 2010, he was essentially a ticking bomb! That bomb blew up on January 4, 2013.

As a parallel, the shooting by Adam Lanza of twenty-six persons in a school in Newtown, Connecticut, including six and seven year old first graders also showed a person with an odd personality. Something the people around him dismissed as having just another nerd in school. I have always said that the mother, whom he first killed before proceeding to the school, could have provided authorities with more information about her son that would have averted the bloodbath. Sadly, she was silenced before anyone had an inkling as to what would make Lanza snap like that.

Right now, this is the issue that insistent pro-gun groups both here and in the US are driving at. That there should be a better screening process for would be gun owners, and even stricter ones for those who want permits to carry outside their residences. In my opinion, permits to carry for civilians should be on a limited basis, such as those with actual threats to their lives, cashiers or couriers who transport money and field agents of some government agencies. Not just any Juan who wants to carry a piece, so to speak. Those involved in illegal discharges of their weapons are clearly not responsible gun owners, and should have their guns taken away from them.

What also needs to be addressed is the punishment for those who just fire their guns for no reason at all, such as New Year’s. Alarm and scandal is hardly the right infraction for someone who fires his gun in a celebratory manner, as evidenced by the number of people hit by stray bullets every New Year’s! I can think of some other people that deserve to be charged with alarm and scandal simply by waking up! But that’s another story. The infraction must be heavier and the punishment stiffer for those who fire their guns! Otherwise, we should all be on the lookout for another person who may just snap one day!