As barrels cool around the country, the debate on gun control heats up

Related: MHCC responds to increased national violence with new safety plan

President Obama came out swinging last week with new proposals for gun control in the wake of a series of bloody shootings, agitating both sides of the congressional aisle.

The proposals include: universal background checks for all gun sales; a renewed and stronger assault weapon ban; limiting magazine sizes to 10 rounds; banning possession of armor-piercing rounds by anyone other than police officers or military personnel; increasing penalties for gun trafficking; increasing the ranks of police officers; expanding mental health programs; and providing $30 million in grants for public schools to put together emergency response plans.

Obama also included a set of executive actions, meaning actions he as the president can take without going through Congress. The actions include: a presidential memorandum that requires federal agencies to make “relevant data” available for background checks; having the attorney general review categories of people banned from owning guns; providing a federal letter from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to private gun sellers on proper background checks; reviewing safety standards on gun locks and safes; tracing guns confiscated in criminal investigations; providing police officers, first responders and school officials with training for armed attack scenarios; developing model emergency response plans for schools, higher education institutions and houses of worship; and clarifying to health care providers the scope of mental health services that Medicaid covers.

The Advocate believes these proposals are remarkably reasonable.

There seems to be a minority of people who would agree with this statement, or at least a minority who are willing to be vocal about it.

Bipartisan resistance has come out strong, zeroing in on how unlikely it seems for this to pass in both houses of Congress. Yes, folks, bipartisan support against the gun control proposals. Senate Democratic Majority leader Harry Reid of Nevada, himself a gun owner, has shown reluctance to try and pass the proposals in the form of a bill, citing uncertainty over whether it would pass in the House of Representatives. This is saying something, when the notoriously fractious Congress seems to be of a similar mind on such a controversial topic.

However, Democratic Rep. Elizabeth Esty of Connecticut is behind Obama and increased gun control. The Democratic governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo, who is also a gun owner, signed into law increased gun regulations on Tuesday, the first since the Newtown shootings in Connecticut last month. The New York regulations are similar to Obama’s federal proposals: They strengthen the state’s existing assault weapons ban, limit the number of bullets in magazines and strengthen rules for the mentally ill that include reports on any harmful behavior tendencies.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) has Obama in its sights over his strategy. The group’s outcry has included comments about how the proposals ignore the nation’s domestic security, especially children.

In addition, the NRA released an attack ad even before Obama’s proposals were unveiled, calling him an “elitist hypocrite,” citing that while he supports stricter gun control and is skeptical about allowing armed security in schools nationwide, his children are protected by armed guards. It also links Obama’s desire for the wealthy to pay “their fair share” of taxes to his “hypocrisy” over armed school guards.

However, this advertisement brings up several key points that go to show that the NRA is badly overreaching: There is no link between Obama wanting to make the wealthy pay their fair share in taxes and gun control, except perhaps in the minds of wealthy, gun-owning conservatives; outside groups might seek to abduct the president’s family to use against him and the nation, hence the fact that presidential family members are all protected by Secret Service agents; and, finally, that the NRA seems to be quite fond of using children to do the fighting for them, in this case by alluding to the fact that Obama is putting the nation’s children at risk while his are snug and safe, when in reality his daughters are probably exposed to more danger on account of their close relation to the president than is the average child.

Another point of contention in this whole gun control debate is this: Why the hell does the average citizen need to own an assault rifle?

Most proponents of the Second Amendment argue that gun control laws attack the amendment, which states, ” 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.”

However, one must remember that the Second Amendment was written in the late 18th century and right after the nation had revolted from Great Britain and had to deal with hostile nations on almost all sides. There also were no assault rifles or widespread gun-related massacres like those our nation currently seems to experience with disturbing regularity. Now, while the drug cartels are not a threat to sniff at, there is no foreign army poised on the U.S. borders waiting to invade, rape and pillage.

Thus, while the proposals would infringe upon an American’s right to own an assault rifle, they would not infringe upon the right to own other guns, such as pistols or hunting rifles. If someone argues for the need of assault rifles on account of personal safety, it would be curious see what kind of threats they are facing. For example, no one needs to be able to unload a 30-round clip into a burglar from 600 yards away.

The issue of gun control is a long and complicated one, but in light of recent national events, it would seem to be irresponsible for the nation as a whole not to take actions against repeat tragedies. While some claim there are flaws within the proposals, at least Obama has decided to take a stand and offer a plan to change the way things are handled in relation to gun ownership and gun-related emergencies. While many citizens will still claim that gun control is not an end-all-be-all solution, it’s at least a step in the right direction.