Gray Column: Responding to guns on trains article

Very seldom do I write about the same issue over a short period of time, but this week I feel the need.

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about guns on trains. The focus was the Virginia Rail Express board’s decision to allow firearms on trains in accordance to Virginia law.

My opinion was then and is now that there should be an exemption for the VRE so that they are not required to comply with the law.

That’s my opinion and I am sticking to it. A few people e-mailed me asking for clarification on my opinion.

But additionally, I really felt the need to write something to close this subject out based upon a few other comments.

First, I am not now nor never have been against gun owners’ rights to own a gun. I am all for it, when it comes to protecting life and property.

I just believe that there are places where public safety trumps the desire to have a gun. I know some folks are cringing at that statement, but again, I’m sticking to it.

One example would be at something like a government building. Obviously you can’t just walk into the U.S. Capitol building with a loaded gun. Chances are you would never make it past the front
entrance. Why? Mainly because it puts lives at risk, specifically those conducting government business. If it’s good enough for a public/government building, why shouldn’t it be good enough for a public
train like the VRE.

So before someone misunderstands my opinion, which apparently has happened over the last couple of weeks, I am not against gun owners.

I simply believe that certain rights require a tremendous responsibility not only by the individuals but by our local, state and federal governments by the laws they make and the way those laws are
administered.

With that said, let me move on to my next point.

I am also writing this because of some of the e-mails I received, some nice and some not so nice, about the reasoning of my opinion.

I am always humbled and appreciative when people respond, positively or negatively, to the things I write.

But at the same time we should remain civil in our approach. Some of the online responses and a few personal e-mails got downright ugly and insulting, especially the ones to the folks engaging each
other in the online discussions. I know that for whatever reason when we talk about gun rights issues things get heated, but they should never get insulting.

Fortunately most of the people, when it came to personal e-mails, expressed themselves in a way that made their points but at the same time kept everything “above the belt.” But there were a few.

Not that I am of the authority to chastise anyone for what they say or believe. But as I read a few things, I began wondering if we all had the same goal in mind.

At the end of the day for me, that goal is not to be right.

Rather it means trying to do what’s right by expressing myself in a way that stirs debate and awareness of an issue such that we achieve the four-word goal at the beginning of the Preamble of the U.S.
Constitution: form a more perfect union.

Davon Gray works in Washington and resides in Woodbridge. Contact him at davongray@verizon.net.