I am pro-gun.
I believe that self defense is a basic human right and I believe that modern firearms are an individuals best choice for self defense. The landmark ruling by the supreme court finally lays to rest the debate in the American public sphere as to the individual nature of the 2nd Amendment. I believe that it is almost universally accepted that there are certain people who should not be allowed access to weapons, IE: violent criminals and the Mentally ill.
I also believe that on either side of the debate in the past there have been two basic agreed upon problems, that being accidental deaths of (especially of minors) with firearms and the rate of violent crime committed with firearms. I believe these two problems exist and should be combated and I believe that whether pro-gun or anti-gun it can be agreed upon that something should be done to mitigate these two occurrences. What has been hotly debated and fought over is what should be done. the two sides in the debate (pro-gun and anti-gun) have fought over what comes down to wether or not the problem should be addressed through legislation (gun bans, gun free zones, restrictions on purchasing amounts, restrictions on ammo purchases) or through education (the eddie egle program etc).
Now that the 2nd Amendment has been confirmed to guarantee an individual right, I believe, we can move to combating directly the two above mentioned problems and the debate, though continuing, has lessened on at least one point.
You cannot ban the ownership of firearms for self defense.
However, the above two problems still need to be addressed and still need to be combated. How do we reduce the number of accidental deaths and criminal usages involving firearms? What information do we need to be able to even make a decision regarding how to go about doing something about these things?
I believe now, may actually be the time to reach across the aisle on this debate and try to form some kind of plan of action on this. I believe that the pro-gun community should now lend it's expertise on the subject of firearms to creating a solution for this. I do not believe that legislating trigger locks or keeping weapons inoperable was the answer. I do however believe (and I am sure I am not alone in this) that proper security of weapons when not in use is important. I also believe that education is the answer rather than legislation.
I know that there is still a large amount of work to be done defending the second amendment, and I know that the work will continuously be needed.
However, now is the time to redouble our efforts into producing solutions to the problems America faces. We are the ones with an intimate understanding of firearms, we are the one who can more readily understand the pitfalls of regulation and of certain strategies. Shouldn't we be the ones to come up with something that actually can work? Should we be the ones to reach across the aisle to our opponents and agree to work on these two problems. To offer our collective knowledge and understanding?
Now we have an opportunity to start with a new understanding and look at these problems with a critical, pragmatic eye to something that can really work. There will be pitfalls, yes, there will be problems, yes, there will be issues of contention that dialog may not be able to assuage. However, I think that it the impetus is on us, as part of the shooting community to take the first steps forward to establish something we really can call a "common sense solution".