Taking My Stand On Gun Control

It seems as if everything that can be said has been said about gun control. Regardless, it is important for all Americans to weigh in on this issue. It requires careful consideration of every view, every need, all beliefs and every fact; all must be put on the table.
And so I write this not to uncover new ground but to express my position and take my stand.  I am opposed to the unobstructed proliferation of guns of all description in the United States. I am a proponent of a common sense approach to the problem unfettered by emotions such as anger or fear or greed.
In all that has been written on the subject I have found but one article with which I entirely agree. It is written with common sense, without emotion, and from a base of knowledge and experience.  It is written by a man who has used many of these weapons, including the AR-15 used frequently in mass shootings, knows them intimately and is trained in their use. The author has served in the U.S. Marine Corp, the Secret Service, as a State Trooper and on a SWAT team. He has been a firearms instructor for the New Jersey State Police. But he has also administrated teacher preparation programs in two universities and has spent substantial time in schools, both urban and suburban, privileged as well as  poor and unsafe. He has a Ph.D. in political science and he knows the constitution.  The man is Scott Fina.
His points have been heard before but seldom heard based in the experience and understanding of an individual so eminently qualified to comment on every important aspect of the issue.

He says the following:
The Second Amendment of the Constitution was written for conditions in 1791, not 2013.
Those advocating the arming of citizens such as teachers misunderstand the realities of gun shootings.
Those suggesting that effective screening of gun purchasers will make ownership of semi-automatic and other firearms safe in our country vastly overstate the administrative capabilities of government.
Those advocating such screening understate the potential actions of normally behaved citizens during conditions of prolonged stress or emotional duress.
That gun proliferation has required law enforcement to escalate its own training and weaponry.
That the presence of a gun always brings a certain degree of danger to every situation.

Every one of these points resonates with me. But I have never experienced any of it. He has.
Finally, he has this to say: "Numerous studies indicate an unquestionable, positive correlation between the prevalence of guns in a society and its death rate. Of course this would be the case; diseases spread when their causes (germs or guns) are present in greater numbers."

Scott Fina's article Say No To Guns appeared in the Santa Maria Sun and can be found here.