Over the past few years, after every firearm-related tragedy that makes national news, cries of gun-control and reform ring out over every medium. Some even go as far as calling for the outright banning of firearms, despite the words of the Second Amendment.
The numbers to back up these cries show that roughly 15,500 individuals under the age of 19 are injured by firearms each year, according to USA Today. A common mantra that can be heard from this coalition is that “if it saves just one child, then it is worth it.”
Interestingly, these individuals and groups are mum on the issues of televisions in the American household. No, I’m not talking about some of the programming that somehow finds its way onto the screen, though that certainly could be the basis for another column.
According to a study released in the journal Pediatrics, 17,000 children under the age of 18 are injured each year by TVs. These startling numbers, however, have not created a nationwide cry for legislation reform. Nor have they earned even a remark by the President.
Therefore, let me be the first to say that TV-centered legislation reform should be addressed in every state and at the federal level. Whether that takes the form of increased safety laws, such as requirements that all TVs be purchased with a wall attachment, or stricter laws like increased background checks.
In fact, every individual that wishes to purchase a TV should have to go through a licensing process and wait three days before he or she can take the TV home. At the very least, background checks should include all sales through such avenues as flea markets, yard sales and Craigslist, rather than focusing solely on licensed sellers.
Even better, since the right to own a TV is not a constitutional right, why not just ban TVs altogether? If these laws save only one child, then they will have been worth it.
Of course, what I am calling for sounds ridiculous because, well, it is. I just want to know why people don’t find it ridiculous when individuals make the same claims in regards to gun control legislation, sometimes going as far as labeling their opponents as enemies of children and all affected by firearm tragedies.
As we can see, gun control is not rooted in simply “saving the children,” because if it were, then statistics such as this would get just as much attention and emotional response.
The next time that someone tries to tell you that they are in favor of stricter gun control laws, ask them about their feelings toward TVs. Perhaps someday the noise will die down, though I highly doubt it.
Trenton Winford is a public policy leadership major from Madison.
