The Political Science Symposium hosted its annual debate Tuesday night in the Hughes-Trigg Theater. Glen Caroline, director of the Grassroots Division of the National Rifle Association, and Peter Hamm, communications director of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, faced off in a discussion about gun control in America.
Each representative was given 15 minutes to present arguments to the audience. After that, they got five minutes to rebut the other’s argument, followed by a question-and-answer session with the audience.
Thanks to a winning coin toss, Caroline gave the first volley.
He started his argument by saying that he and Hamm wanted the same thing: “to reduce criminal access to guns and firearm-related accidents.”
The source of the debate, he said, was how to go about doing so.
Describing the NRA as the “original civil rights group,” Caroline emphasized the need to enforce gun laws already on the books, not add to them. He said there were more than 20,000 gun control laws at federal, state and local levels.
Plus, he said, laws don’t stop criminals “hell-bent” on committing crimes. “Law-abiding citizens with lawful purposes” shouldn’t have their right to bear arms impinged upon, he added.
But Hamm took issue with Caroline’s assertion that the right of individuals to bear arms was “beyond debate.”
“For 70 years it’s been argued,” said Hamm. “The courts have only upheld that there’s a right to a well-regulated militia.”
Hamm said that “the current distribution system of firearm manufacturers” directly contributes to violence and illegal gun activity. Background checks are easily avoided, and bulk gun purchases are still legal. He said that common-sense laws were needed.
“The male hormones in me call out to have a grenade launcher on my gun, but it’s not necessary,” he said.
The Castle Doctrine, which was signed into law in Texas last Tuesday, was a hot topic at the debate. The bill states that a person doesn’t have a duty to retreat from an attack before using deadly force. Under the new law, people won’t be held criminally or civilly responsible for harm to the person they perceive as a threat or bystanders who may get hit by stray bullets.
Caroline compared Hamm’s indignation at the law’s passage to the Brady Campaign’s response to the introduction of concealed weapons permits.
Twenty years after the right-to-carry laws were passed, he said, the opposition’s fears that violence would spike were “proven wrong.”
As for the Castle Doctrine, Caroline said the NRA whole-heartedly supports it.
“We trust the people” to use their judgment about personal safety, he said. For “those few who become vigilantes,” the courts have the ability to see they are prosecuted.
Hamm, however, referred to the law as the “Shoot First” law.
“The message to the most aggressive members of society receive from the passage of this law is to go ahead and shoot, and you won’t be held accountable,” he said.
At the end of the night, though, the speakers agreed to disagree.
Hamm acknowledged that the national debate has been a long and heated one.
“We’re not going to resolve this in an hour,” he said.
