Nation’s gun laws lack common sense

The Supreme Court in 2005 ruled that the job of the police is not to protect any individual. Their job is to enforce the law. With that decision, common sense would dictate that protecting oneself is the responsibility of the individual. A person with common sense would also know that a violent crime could be committed anywhere, anytime. That would suggest that a law-abiding citizen properly trained in firearms should be prepared to protect himself everywhere, at all times. That is until the police can respond to enforce the law.

Contrary to popular belief, firearm deaths have dramatically decreased in this country. The Daily Herald recently had an article on those facts. This has all happened while firearms ownership and carry has increased throughout the country.

There are folks in the community and groups being formed clamoring for more gun laws, common sense gun laws. It’s estimated that there are around 20,000 local, state and federal firearm laws. Which ones are we going to get rid of? I’m having a hard time finding common sense in 20,000. One example in Illinois is, if a private, law-abiding citizen tries to transport a firearm in their vehicle legally, and drives from one end of the state to the other, they would never know when they were abiding by or violating local statutes during the transporting of that firearm.

Common sense would be to streamline firearm laws to be straightforward so an individual could choose or not choose to protect oneself legally everywhere, until the police could respond to enforce the law. By the way, I’m not a member of the NRA; I’m just for common sense firearm laws.

Steven Kochanny

Buffalo Grove