Column: A unique perspective on gun laws

“Quiet, Gramps,” whispers my 10-year-old granddaughter as we slowly walk a moss-covered trail in the mountains of Idaho. “I think I hear something.” 

We stop, listen closely and hear the brush rustling. The noise gets louder as we quietly kneel just off the trail. “It’s getting closer,” I offer, press the safety switch to the fire position on my 7-millimeter magnum rifle and prepare for a shot.

Grunting, breaking branches, crunching rocks and horns clashing excite us as we make eye contact. “They’re fighting,” I whisper with excitement as Rory returns a grin. We continue to listen, experiencing an intimate moment of two bull elk displaying dominance in hope of leading the herd.

The noise quickly ends as loud, thunderous hoofs and crashing timber fades into the valley. Rising from our perch, I return the gun to the safe position and walk down the trail to examine the battle. The ground looks like it’s been plowed by a damaged disc. Rocks are overturned, branches broken and scat litters the ground. “That’s amazing,” my granddaughter giggles and I agree.

I have hunted since I was old enough to take hunter’s safety. I hunt not for the trophy but for the meat and the experience. Being outdoors, hiking, tracking game, researching the habits and traits of wild animals and processing the meat once harvested ground me. I seldom purchase processed or ranch-raised meat and try to eat only wild game at home.

I also enjoy the sport of shooting. I own 13 guns and shoot most of them regularly. I enjoy the challenge of taking long shots at small targets and pride myself on being steady, accurate and calm — traits necessary to consistently hit one’s target.

Guns have been a major part of my life for most of my life. This being said, I’m struggling. The recent onslaught of gun violence in America concerns me greatly. I come to this argument of gun ownership and gun control from a unique perspective.

I work in a gun-free zone as the principal of an elementary school, spent 11 years in the United States Air Force and am a psychotherapist. Let me connect the dots.

Life as a school principal changed dramatically after the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School. On Dec. 14, 2012, in Newtown, Conn., 20-year-old Adam Lanza fatally shot 20 children and six adult staff members.

Since this shooting, my school has been locked-down. All playground gates are locked, exterior doors to my building, are locked and to gain entry to my building parents, guests and students must look into a video camera and ask permission to have the door remotely unlocked once the person is deemed safe.

Monthly our school practices shelter-in-place, security holds and lockdown drills. Students hide under desks, behind counters and in lockers to avoid being seen by a potential gunman. I hate explaining to a 5-year-old that we have to practice a lockdown drill because someone with a gun might be in our school trying to kill him or her. This is not something that should happen in a civilized society.

Some suggest we should arm teachers to protect our schools. In the military, we are trained to eliminate threats. This training takes years and is reinforced monthly with exercises, range days, a stringent code of ethics and in-depth weapons handling. Without this training, one becomes a hindrance rather than an attribute in a stressful situation.

Often people state the recent increase in mass-killings is not a gun issue but a mental health issue. I agree to some degree but disagree that guns bear no ownership in these killings. Before becoming a principal, I was a psychotherapist in private practice and a school counselor. I often counsel people who struggle with mental illness.

Every counselor has a duty to warn if the counselor feels a patient is in danger of hurting oneself or another. With this report, the counselor must ensure the danger has passed before this duty is exhausted. Presently there is no national registry, reporting protocol or system in-place to report a person who has a history of mental health issues. So, a person can see a therapist and have a tendency to hurt others but, once the acute threat has passed, the person can have access to a gun.

The sticky issue with a national registry is the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. People who have mental health issues fight hard to gain equal rights. Who will decide what mental health issues eliminate one’s ability to own a gun? Who will decide when one is deemed mentally competent to again own a gun? Who do you want in charge of these decisions?

In parallel with the 14th Amendment is the Second Amendment: “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Short of passing a new Constitutional Amendment what might be done to keep our society safe?

The struggle with this issue is the polarizing emotions concerning guns. Some feel guns should be tightly regulated following the 1996 National Firearms Agreement between all Australian states while others feel the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun and free-carry should be the law of the land.

Bringing these two differing views to the table to talk sensibly about compromise proves futile. Without compromise, we will continue to have mass-murders, senseless violence and bury more American victims.

Send comments or other suggestions to William Rutherford at bprutherford@hotmail.com or visit pensiveparenting.com.