Gun control has never been a small issue inside the United
States, but ever since the Connecticut massacre that left 20 children and 6
adults dead it’s been bigger than ever. Some are calling for stricter gun
control laws, saying that we need to prevent guns from getting into the hands
of those who would use them for evil. Others say the answer is in more guns,
and that if more people owned firearms there would be less crime.
It’s a sensitive issue, and everyone has their own opinion.
The residents of a small town in Maine expressed theirs earlier this week.
Byron, a town of just 140 residents voted
on and rejected a proposal that would have required every household to own a firearm
and ammunition.
The measure was unanimously rejected by residents, and even
the resident who conceived the measure, Bruce Simmons, voted against it.
Besides that, even if the measure had passed, it would have been unenforceable
due to an existing Maine law that disallows municipalities from legislating on
firearms.
So what was the point? Those who “backed” the measure claim
say the whole point was to send a symbolic message to the federal government
about passing gun control laws—whether or not it passed.
Simmons said, “I feel we accomplished what we set out to do
and I hope we will wake this town up. We made a statement to the federal
government that they can’t take our guns away.”
But Byron is not the only town voting on such measures. In
Nelson, Georgia, the city council will vote on April 1st on whether
or not to pass an
ordinance that would require all head of households to have a gun. The town
has 1,300 residents and has a single police officer, and backers of the
ordinance claim it could help keep crime down.
Like Byron’s ordinance, this one will not be enforced and
exempts criminals, the mentally ill, paupers, and those who are conscientiously
opposed to maintaining firearms. It’s a message from one small town to the rest
of the United States.
إرسال تعليق