by Rick Stack
Many American’s who believe in the right to carry firearms claim that if the U.S. outlaws the carrying of guns in public, only the outlaws will have guns and law-abiding citizens will not be able to protect themselves from the criminal element. However, the statistics would indicate that a “good guy with a gun” will be able to stop a “bad guy with a gun” in so few cases as to make the Spaniards’ search for the fabled El Dorado seem almost realistic by comparison (or, if you prefer, you can substitute the search for unicorns or a 4-leaf clover for El Dorado).
You can probably count on one, or possibly, two hands the number of instances in the U.S. each year when a “good guy” civilian with a gun stops a criminal with a gun. In the vast majority of such cases, however, the gun is turned AGAINST the civilian or his/her family members and they become crime statistics. Civilian gun owners, like 
auto drivers, naturally overestimate their ability to effectively respond to life-threatening situations and as a result, they often end up dead. Even police and military personnel with extensive training and target practice can only hit their target WELL SHORT of 50 per cent of the time (just think back to the two police 
shootings in Times Square in the last few years, when police fired at perps but instead ended up hitting innocent bystanders). Thus, I would submit that citizens who carry firearms may feel safer but that it is only an ILLUSION of safety.
For that reason, I will never own or possess a firearm nor will I subject my family to the increased danger of death by firearms. I also will not allow my family members to stay with anyone who possesses a firearm. That being said, I agree that U.S. citizens should be able to own and carry handguns if that is what they choose to do. However, reasonable people should be able to agree on at least some of the following moderate gun reform measures:
*
The ban on semiautomatic and automatic weapons that helped to stop mass shootings from 1994-2004 should be reinstated.
* There should be reasonable restrictions on the manufacture, sale, and purchase of high-capacity ammunition clips (i.e., no more than 10 bullets in each clip and a person cannot purchase more than 2 such clips each month).
* The manufacture, sale, and possession or armored-piercing (i.e., “cop-killer”) ammunition should be banned.
* There should be background checks required for the transfer or sale of ALL firearms, including transfers or sales at gun shows.
* All ammunition manufactured or sold in the U.S. should be embedded with bullet-unique tracer material so that it is possible for law enforcement to more easily determine the identity of people who commit homicides.
*
Any person who has been adjudged mentally ill or who has had a mental competency proceeding filed against him/her should be prohibited from owning a firearm.
* Any person who wishes to obtain a concealed carry permit should be required to undergo extensive firearms safety training and to achieve an acceptable degree of accuracy in target practice with his/her chosen firearm.
* All gun owners should be required to be licensed, trained, and certified for safety purposes. After all, why should it be EASIER for a person to obtain a gun license than it is to have a driver’s license?
The above suggestions would not impinge on our treasured Second Amendment individual right to keep and bear arms. No 
constitutional right is absolute or unfettered, however; rather, any individual’s rights must necessarily be balanced against the rights of other people. For that reason, the First Amendment does not allow me to falsely yell “fire” in a crowded movie theater, nor does it allow me to make criminal threats of assault against another person. I acknowledge the Second Amendment rights of a citizen to keep and bear arms; however, that citizen must also acknowledge my right not to get shot by his/her firearm.