It is common in the homes of toddlers to have gates at the top of stairs lest a child fall. There is hardly a family car without a car seat for the very young and seat belts for older children. Playground surfaces are composed of force-absorbing materials. Detergent and medication containers have caps difficult for adults to open so that they will be impossible for children to open.
We most certainly are a society that cares about our children. We hold their hand as we cross the street. We inoculate them to prevent illness. It is obvious that we very much care for our children.
It is impossible to eliminate all risk to our children. For example, it is possible that harm might occur crossing the street, but one must do so to leave the block. There are other inherent risks in daily life that are essentially unavoidable, but others can be avoided with simple solutions.
How is it possible then that when firearms are the largest cause of death in children, we take no action? Although simply having a gun in the home is a statistical hazard for injury or death, we continue to have guns in a very high percentage of homes, many of them not stored securely.
What possible rationale justifies this endangerment of children?
Sandra Shimon
Oak Park