Banning domestic abusers from purchasing or owning firearms seems so reasonable at first blush, but is it? Really? Not so much if you think about mindset of the abuser. Domestic abuse is a crime of passion, horribly twisted passion. A knife, a hammer, a chair, a fist, any weapon will do. And if a firearm is desired, one will be procured illegally. Thus, banning gun sales to convicted domestic abusers seems a futile effort, doesn't it? But it makes those who wish to do something, to salve their good intentions, to appear self-righteous in the face of the evil that is guns, it will make them feel good even it they accomplish nothing. How much better would it be if we attacked domestic abuse rather than the gun? Sadly, who has any passion left for that effort after we've shot our wad on the great gun control debate?
Sounds reasonable to me, if it requires a conviction to trigger it. If felons can be barred from owning firearms, those convicted of domestic abuse should certainly be in the same category. Domestic abusers are just as likely (if not more likely) to continue their abuse and even to escalate it to murder.
Read This Next