Nancy Wong

In view of last Friday’s Supreme Court ruling on Roe v Wade, as well as its recent ruling on the already sparse restrictions on guns, I have a modest proposal: Every person who wants to buy a gun that can take a life should be subject to the same restrictions and humiliating treatment a woman endures if she wants an abortion.

Let’s start with a mandatory 48-72 hour waiting period; parental permission (or court order if you are under age); obligatory lectures to ensure that gun advocates fully understand the implications of owning a weapon that can kill; and mandatory screening of a film demonstrating the damage a bullet does to a human body.

In order to buy a gun, people would have to travel hundreds of miles to find the nearest gun shop, take time off from work and stay overnight in a strange town in order to obtain a weapon that can take a life. They might even have to sleep in their car if they are poor.

Having made the decision to own a weapon that kills, gun buyers/owners would be forced to walk through a gauntlet of people screaming at them about “life” and having gruesome pictures showing the damage bullets do to a human body shoved in their face.

If taking “pre-born life” is banned, it makes sense to ban weapons that can, and do, take the actual life of thousands of the “already born” every year.

Planned Parenthood clinics provide life-saving low-cost health care for women and babies as well as providing reproductive health care services and contraception for men, and they actually do save lives.

Preventing unrestricted access to guns also saves lives.

If access to abortion can be restricted or banned on the grounds that a zygote, blastocyst or an embryo is viable “life,” perhaps those six Supreme Court judges who have broken their promises to uphold precedent or Roe vs Wade, should turn their eyes to guns so that millions of the “already born” do not have to fear for their lives as they shop, work and go to school or a cinema.

Kathleen Mary Tepper lives in Norwalk.