52% Of Voters Now Live In A Household With A Gun

The chart above reflects the results of the new NBC News Poll -- done between November 10th and 14th of a nationwide sample of 1,000 registered voters, with a 3.1 point margin of error.

It shows that a record 52% of registered voters now live in a household where someone owns a gun. That's 10 points higher than in 2013 (42%), and 6 points higher than 2016 (46%). Evidently, more people now believe they are safer with a gun in the house.

They are wrong. A family member is far more likely to be killed (or injured) by a gun in those households than in a household with no gun. This is simply not the way to a safer society.

I am not one of those who believes the Second Amendment doesn't actually give Americans the right to own a gun. It clearly does. But like other constitutional rights, it is not absolute. The Supreme Court has ruled that there are limits to the right (such as the kind of weapon that can be owned and the loss of the right by dangerous people such as felons).

But I cannot believe that the route to a safer society is more gun ownership. The real route to a safer society is to control who is able to legally buy a gun. Most people know this. Over 80% of adults (including most gun owners) would like to see a stricter background check law on gun purchases (or gifts).

A strict background check law would not impinge of the right of law-abiding citizens to buy or receive a gun, because they could easily pass the check. Failure to pass such a law doesn't protect the rights of law-abiding citizens (as Republicans claim). It just allows dangerous people (like felons) to legally buy a gun.

This must be changed, but it will only happen when politicians opposing a background check law (mainly Republicans) are voted out of office.

The Owners ARE Responsible

Last May 18th, seven-year-old Tanner Joshua Monk left his home to go play with some neighbor children. He never got there. His body was found that afternoon in a ditch surrounded by four pit bulls. The dogs, owned by a neighbor, had killed the child.

When deputies arrived, two of the dogs attacked them and had to be killed. As they tried to take the other two dogs, the owners didn't want to give one of them up. They claimed it was a "house dog", even though it still had the child's blood on it.

I have to admit that I really don't understand dog owners like this. They have the right to own dangerous animals, but not if they're unwilling to control them. They don't seem to realize that everyone else has the right to not be terrorized by their animals. Children and the elderly are particularly vulnerable to these animals and are many times unable to protect themselves.

In the last session, the Texas Legislature passed a law to protect the public from dog owners who won't control their dangerous animals. That law holds these owners responsible if their animals kill or injure anyone. I supported the law when it was passed, and I'm glad to see it being enforced. Everyone should have the right to walk the streets without being menaced or attacked by the animals of irresponsible owners.

Last week the new law was used for the first time. Crystal Michelle Watson and Jack Wayne Smith, the owners of the dogs that killed young Tanner, were convicted and sentenced to seven years in prison. They were lucky. They could have been sentenced to as much as twenty years.

Frankly, I don't feel any sympathy for them. Those dogs couldn't have hurt anyone if they had not been allowed to run free. Watson and Smith must accept that they are responsible for a child's death.