Speaker considers moral issues of gun ownership, control

The moral and ethical issues of owning guns, as well as the pros and cons of enforcing restrictions on gun ownership, were the topics addressed by an ethics professor Monday.

Most people have a tendency to think of the issue of gun control in terms of black and white — many are either completely for it or against it, Hugh LaFollette said. He proposed that the issue was much more complex than simply agreeing or disagreeing with gun control.

While LaFollette suggested that the right to bear arms was not a fundamental right, he also said that there were drawbacks to enforcing strict gun laws.

One such risk is what he referred to as "over criminalizing" gun ownership. "In this country, I don’t think that we are aware of the negative consequences of making anything illegal," he said.

By placing tight restrictions on gun ownership that many Americans strongly oppose, LaFollette said the government would lose public support, similar to the reaction of the American public to prohibition in the 1920s.

Nor does he feel that strict gun control laws would solve the problem of gun violence in the United States since most guns involved in crimes are purchased through illegal secondary markets.

Instead, LaFollette said there was a middle ground between absolute restrictions on gun control and allowing free reign in gun ownership.

He suggested that Americans should be free to own guns, but would face stiff financial penalties if their weapons are used in any crime.

"I thought it was very informative, and he presented information from a perspective I had never heard before," said freshman Greg Bronstein.

Sophomore Lee Ann Zondag said, "I agreed with [LaFollette] that if children are in the house and they are accidentally killed then the owners of the gun are responsible."