原创翻译：《枪声再惊美利坚》

原标题：Another Day, Another Shooting

链接：http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sh ... hoot_b_7861924.html  赫芬顿邮报，无敏感词，无需翻墙

Hours ago, there was a shooting in Lafayette, Louisiana. Last week, a military recruiting station and Naval Operational Support Center were attacked. And before that, the sentencing of a shooter who attacked a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado years ago.

数小时前，路易斯安那州的拉斐特发生了一场枪击案。上周，一处征兵站和海军行动支援中心遭到了袭击。而在此前，法院对一年前袭击了科罗拉多州奥罗拉市电影院的枪手做出了判决。

There aren't many issues that incite ire and outrage like the gun debate. We keep having these shootings, yet nothing seems to change for the better. That seems to be in part because the battle lines are so sharply drawn.

再没有其他的问题会像控枪辩论这样激起愤慨和暴怒了，我们就任由这些枪击案这么发生却不能提出什么有效的应对之策。随着战线的扩大，这些问题似乎已经被深深地卷入其中了。

On one side, you have "gun rights" advocates declaring that no one can regulate or legislate their right to own as many firearms as possible. They insist that the 2nd amendment gives them carte blanche to do whatever they please with guns. The behavior of this side ranges from crazy to also crazy. Some choose to mount 'open carry' demonstrations where they can brandish assault rifles in retail establishments and restaurants; others -- often those most afraid of government overreach -- post up outside military recruitment centers to protect the troops they both fear and love from terrorists.
一方面，那些主张“持枪权”的人声称没有人可以对他们尽可能多的持有武器的权利加以规范和立法，他们坚持第二修正案全权赋予他们可以任意处置枪械的权利。这一方面的表现所波及的范围越来越大，有些人选择发起公开持枪的示威活动，而在示威中他们可以在商品零售场所和餐厅这些场合挥舞他们的突击步枪。还有些最为担心政府会扩张过度的人，则在征兵中心外面张贴海报以保护被恐怖分子又爱又恨的阿兵哥们。

On the other side of the debate, you have a tiny minority advocating for a complete ban on guns. While their position doesn't put anyone at risk from accidental discharges or deadly public signaling failures, it is absolutely an impractical (and unconstitutional) solution for a country that owns as many firearms as America.

另一方面，有极少数人主张全面禁枪。不过鉴于这些人的主张不会让任何人因为意外的污染气体排放和要命的交通信号故障而处于危险之中，所以他们的解决方案在美国这个持枪者拥有多少武器都可以的国家里，是绝对不切实际（也是违宪的）的。

But the truth is that most of us are somewhere in the middle. We want to protect our communities. We want to keep our children safe when they go to school and ensure that our neighbors can go to work without fear of being killed because of the uniform they wear.

但事实是，我们之中的绝大多数人在某些地方势必都会处在问题的中心。我想保护我的社区，我们希望我们的孩子能平平安安的上学，希望能取保我们的邻居在工作的时候不会因为他们身着的制服而害怕被人谋害。

As a 12-year Navy veteran who taught hundreds of Sailors how to effectively employ firearms and non-lethal weapons in the use of force, I think the middle is where our lawmakers need to get, and fast. I would assert that we need common sense reform for what we need to do, at the state level, to maintain our constitutional right to bear arms while arming ourselves with the tools to be safer in public.

作为一个在海军服役了12年的老兵，我指导了数以百计的水手如何在需要使用武力的情况下有效的使用致命和非致命性武器，我认为把握好分寸是我们的立法者所应该做到的，而且还应该尽快的做到。我断定，为了我们必须完成事业，我们需要就我们的常识做出改革。在州一级，是在维护宪法赋予我们携带武器的权利的同时，要确保在武装我们自己情况下不能威胁到公众的安全。

In order to carry a weapon while in the military, a service member must complete a series of requirements to qualify on each individual weapon. Aboard my first ship, I spent a lot more time on the shooting range than most other Sailors because I was in charge of the work center responsible for maintaining and repairing the weapons, as well as for training all of the Sailors at our unit in their employment. Despite the range time I logged, I was still required to shoot a firearms qualification course and attend weapons familiarization training at least once a year. Special forces -- the baddest of the badasses -- too are required to train on these weapons exponentially more than other units.

为了能在部队里公开持枪，相关人员必须达成一系列的对每种武器的单独合格要求。在我登上我的第一艘舰艇之前，我在靶场里耗费了比大多数水手更多的训练时间，因为我在一个工作中心负责着武器的养护及维修，同时也要负责训练在我们单位里所有的水兵，以确保他们能胜任他们的职务。尽管我的日子是在靶场里度过的，可我至少还是需要每年参加一次武器射击的合格培训课程和武器熟悉训练。就算是特种部队那群牛皮哄哄的大手子，也需要接受比其他单位多得多的武器训练。

So what does this process I'm proposing look like? It looks like an online application, perhaps even completed on your smartphone or a tablet at the store from which a consumer is purchasing their firearm. Within that online application, you can submit your background check and mental health evaluation questionnaires. This mental health evaluation would need to be conducted by a third-party doctor, in person, who will have already reviewed your questionnaire that was filled out between 1 and 30 days in advance. They would be paid in a manner similar to Medicare (i.e. they apply after your visit and the state reimburses).

那么，我的这些提议执行起来会是什么样子的呢？大概会像一张网络申请，甚至你可能当消费者在商店里购买武器的时候就能通过智能手机和平板电脑完成它了。有了这份网络申请，你就可以提交你的背景调查信息和心理健康评估报告了。这些活动所需的费用会以类似于医保的形式支付。（他们会在你光顾完和国家报销之后提出支付申请）

The ten-day waiting period that we have here in California should still apply, but if you've gone online, applied for your gun license, and completed your background check, mental health evaluation, and 40 hours of training, then you can have a temporary license sent to the licensed firearms dealer of your choice. Consumers showing up without an independent confirmation from the agency to the dealer would not be able to get their weapons. If you are a regular gun purchaser, this process would only happen once per year. If you purchase another firearm between 365 days and 4 years after your initial purchase, you'll have to go through that same background and mental health screening again.

在长达十天的等待过程中，我们在加州仍然会继续提出申请，不过如果你离线了，申请了你自己的持枪许可，并且完成了背景调查和心理健康评估，此外还接受了40个小时的训练，那么你就可以得到一份被寄往你所选择的特许枪械经销商那里的临时持枪许可。消费者若是没有得到权威机构开出的独立证明，那么他们就无法取走他们的武器。如果您是一位经常购买枪械的顾客，这项过程仅仅会隔年生效。要是您在首次购买枪械之后隔1年或者4年再行购买另外的枪械的话，你就得再进行一次同样的背景和心理健康筛查了。

If you do not purchase another weapon, then your firearms license would be renewed on a five-year cycle. After the five years elapsed, and synced with your driver's license, you would go through the background check and mental health evaluations again. Eventually, when you receive your replacement driver's license, you will now have an icon that shows you are a registered gun owner. There could also be a concealed carry icon so that a police officer, bar security, or anyone else you're in close quarters with will know that you are a gun owner -- for your safety and theirs.

如果你不买另外的武器，那么你的持枪证明就有5年的有效试用期，5年后，就像你的驾照会到时过期一样，你得重新再进行一次背景调查和心理健康评估。最后，当你获得你的替换驾照之后，你会得到一个标志证明你是记录在册的持枪者了。对于条子、酒吧保安或是任何你要是靠的太近就会知道他是持枪者的人，会有隐蔽的标志注明这些人的持枪身份——为了你和他们的安全着想。

The best part about all of this? The costs don't fall on you as you're purchasing the gun. They are covered by ammunition purchases: five cents per round for the first five years that the law is in place, dropping to two cents per round after that. The money that the state sees from this revenue would go toward processing, enforcement, mental health checks, training, and other costs associated with this law.

这份构想最妙的地方在哪里？你在买枪的时候费用不会拖累你。费用已经被涵盖在弹药采购里了：第一个5年5美分，此后每5年都会减少费用直至降低到2美分为止。州政府从中获得的收入将大大有助于处理案件，加强执法，心理健康检查、相关的训练以及任何与这项法案有关的花费。

Before you tell me how I am violating your rights by proposing a record of gun owners, note that the constitution does not say that you have the right to bear arms and not tell anyone. We regulate chemicals, elevators, airplanes, and financial transactions -- and none of those are specifically designed to kill other human beings.

在你告诉我我是怎么通过提议对持枪者记录在册而侵犯你的权利之前，你要记住，宪法只是赋予了你持枪的权利，可没说明不能将你持枪的事实公之于众。我们对化学药品、粮仓、机场和金融贸易都进行了管制，可没有一项管制措施是专门设计来害人性命的。

What I'm proposing isn't revolutionary -- it's common sense. It falls in the middle of some really crazy arguments on all sides, exactly where so many of us in this country are, too. But nonetheless, some will say that I'm using this crisis as a political opportunity to push my leftist agenda. This is a cheap and craven line to get out of a tough and necessary conversation. The fact is that, without fresh blood on the ground, no one is listening. We have to have these discussions while families are mourning. We have to care about this beyond prayer, empathy, and hand-wringing. We have to actually make change.

我的提议并不新鲜，只是共识而已。它处在了一些在任何方面都是极其不可理喻的争执中央，正如我们之中的大多数人所处在这个国家的位置中一样。尽管如此，有些人还是会利用这个危机作为他们的政治机遇来推行他们的激进议题。对于必须进行的艰难而又必要的磋商而言，这是低俗的懦夫所为。事实是，没有新鲜的血液加入到商讨中的话，没人会倾听这些议题。还有家庭在哀悼着，我们必须得推行这些谈话了，不能只把我们的关心局限在祈祷、同情和绝望这些层面。我们必须做出些实际的变革了。

It's time to be reasonable. It's time to respect each others' lives as much as we respect each others' rights. It's time to require training and screening for all firearms.
时候变得理智些了，是时候尊重他人的生命就像我们尊重他们的权利那样了，是时候要求对所有持枪者进行训练和筛查了。


本文作者：Shawn Justin VanDiver

Navy veteran and Co-Director of the Truman National Security Project San Diego Chapter   海军老兵、杜鲁门国家安全项目圣迭戈版的合著主编
原标题：Another Day, Another Shooting

链接：http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sh ... hoot_b_7861924.html  赫芬顿邮报，无敏感词，无需翻墙

Hours ago, there was a shooting in Lafayette, Louisiana. Last week, a military recruiting station and Naval Operational Support Center were attacked. And before that, the sentencing of a shooter who attacked a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado years ago.

数小时前，路易斯安那州的拉斐特发生了一场枪击案。上周，一处征兵站和海军行动支援中心遭到了袭击。而在此前，法院对一年前袭击了科罗拉多州奥罗拉市电影院的枪手做出了判决。

There aren't many issues that incite ire and outrage like the gun debate. We keep having these shootings, yet nothing seems to change for the better. That seems to be in part because the battle lines are so sharply drawn.

再没有其他的问题会像控枪辩论这样激起愤慨和暴怒了，我们就任由这些枪击案这么发生却不能提出什么有效的应对之策。随着战线的扩大，这些问题似乎已经被深深地卷入其中了。

On one side, you have "gun rights" advocates declaring that no one can regulate or legislate their right to own as many firearms as possible. They insist that the 2nd amendment gives them carte blanche to do whatever they please with guns. The behavior of this side ranges from crazy to also crazy. Some choose to mount 'open carry' demonstrations where they can brandish assault rifles in retail establishments and restaurants; others -- often those most afraid of government overreach -- post up outside military recruitment centers to protect the troops they both fear and love from terrorists.
一方面，那些主张“持枪权”的人声称没有人可以对他们尽可能多的持有武器的权利加以规范和立法，他们坚持第二修正案全权赋予他们可以任意处置枪械的权利。这一方面的表现所波及的范围越来越大，有些人选择发起公开持枪的示威活动，而在示威中他们可以在商品零售场所和餐厅这些场合挥舞他们的突击步枪。还有些最为担心政府会扩张过度的人，则在征兵中心外面张贴海报以保护被恐怖分子又爱又恨的阿兵哥们。

On the other side of the debate, you have a tiny minority advocating for a complete ban on guns. While their position doesn't put anyone at risk from accidental discharges or deadly public signaling failures, it is absolutely an impractical (and unconstitutional) solution for a country that owns as many firearms as America.

另一方面，有极少数人主张全面禁枪。不过鉴于这些人的主张不会让任何人因为意外的污染气体排放和要命的交通信号故障而处于危险之中，所以他们的解决方案在美国这个持枪者拥有多少武器都可以的国家里，是绝对不切实际（也是违宪的）的。

But the truth is that most of us are somewhere in the middle. We want to protect our communities. We want to keep our children safe when they go to school and ensure that our neighbors can go to work without fear of being killed because of the uniform they wear.

但事实是，我们之中的绝大多数人在某些地方势必都会处在问题的中心。我想保护我的社区，我们希望我们的孩子能平平安安的上学，希望能取保我们的邻居在工作的时候不会因为他们身着的制服而害怕被人谋害。

As a 12-year Navy veteran who taught hundreds of Sailors how to effectively employ firearms and non-lethal weapons in the use of force, I think the middle is where our lawmakers need to get, and fast. I would assert that we need common sense reform for what we need to do, at the state level, to maintain our constitutional right to bear arms while arming ourselves with the tools to be safer in public.

作为一个在海军服役了12年的老兵，我指导了数以百计的水手如何在需要使用武力的情况下有效的使用致命和非致命性武器，我认为把握好分寸是我们的立法者所应该做到的，而且还应该尽快的做到。我断定，为了我们必须完成事业，我们需要就我们的常识做出改革。在州一级，是在维护宪法赋予我们携带武器的权利的同时，要确保在武装我们自己情况下不能威胁到公众的安全。

In order to carry a weapon while in the military, a service member must complete a series of requirements to qualify on each individual weapon. Aboard my first ship, I spent a lot more time on the shooting range than most other Sailors because I was in charge of the work center responsible for maintaining and repairing the weapons, as well as for training all of the Sailors at our unit in their employment. Despite the range time I logged, I was still required to shoot a firearms qualification course and attend weapons familiarization training at least once a year. Special forces -- the baddest of the badasses -- too are required to train on these weapons exponentially more than other units.

为了能在部队里公开持枪，相关人员必须达成一系列的对每种武器的单独合格要求。在我登上我的第一艘舰艇之前，我在靶场里耗费了比大多数水手更多的训练时间，因为我在一个工作中心负责着武器的养护及维修，同时也要负责训练在我们单位里所有的水兵，以确保他们能胜任他们的职务。尽管我的日子是在靶场里度过的，可我至少还是需要每年参加一次武器射击的合格培训课程和武器熟悉训练。就算是特种部队那群牛皮哄哄的大手子，也需要接受比其他单位多得多的武器训练。

So what does this process I'm proposing look like? It looks like an online application, perhaps even completed on your smartphone or a tablet at the store from which a consumer is purchasing their firearm. Within that online application, you can submit your background check and mental health evaluation questionnaires. This mental health evaluation would need to be conducted by a third-party doctor, in person, who will have already reviewed your questionnaire that was filled out between 1 and 30 days in advance. They would be paid in a manner similar to Medicare (i.e. they apply after your visit and the state reimburses).

那么，我的这些提议执行起来会是什么样子的呢？大概会像一张网络申请，甚至你可能当消费者在商店里购买武器的时候就能通过智能手机和平板电脑完成它了。有了这份网络申请，你就可以提交你的背景调查信息和心理健康评估报告了。这些活动所需的费用会以类似于医保的形式支付。（他们会在你光顾完和国家报销之后提出支付申请）

The ten-day waiting period that we have here in California should still apply, but if you've gone online, applied for your gun license, and completed your background check, mental health evaluation, and 40 hours of training, then you can have a temporary license sent to the licensed firearms dealer of your choice. Consumers showing up without an independent confirmation from the agency to the dealer would not be able to get their weapons. If you are a regular gun purchaser, this process would only happen once per year. If you purchase another firearm between 365 days and 4 years after your initial purchase, you'll have to go through that same background and mental health screening again.

在长达十天的等待过程中，我们在加州仍然会继续提出申请，不过如果你离线了，申请了你自己的持枪许可，并且完成了背景调查和心理健康评估，此外还接受了40个小时的训练，那么你就可以得到一份被寄往你所选择的特许枪械经销商那里的临时持枪许可。消费者若是没有得到权威机构开出的独立证明，那么他们就无法取走他们的武器。如果您是一位经常购买枪械的顾客，这项过程仅仅会隔年生效。要是您在首次购买枪械之后隔1年或者4年再行购买另外的枪械的话，你就得再进行一次同样的背景和心理健康筛查了。

If you do not purchase another weapon, then your firearms license would be renewed on a five-year cycle. After the five years elapsed, and synced with your driver's license, you would go through the background check and mental health evaluations again. Eventually, when you receive your replacement driver's license, you will now have an icon that shows you are a registered gun owner. There could also be a concealed carry icon so that a police officer, bar security, or anyone else you're in close quarters with will know that you are a gun owner -- for your safety and theirs.

如果你不买另外的武器，那么你的持枪证明就有5年的有效试用期，5年后，就像你的驾照会到时过期一样，你得重新再进行一次背景调查和心理健康评估。最后，当你获得你的替换驾照之后，你会得到一个标志证明你是记录在册的持枪者了。对于条子、酒吧保安或是任何你要是靠的太近就会知道他是持枪者的人，会有隐蔽的标志注明这些人的持枪身份——为了你和他们的安全着想。

The best part about all of this? The costs don't fall on you as you're purchasing the gun. They are covered by ammunition purchases: five cents per round for the first five years that the law is in place, dropping to two cents per round after that. The money that the state sees from this revenue would go toward processing, enforcement, mental health checks, training, and other costs associated with this law.

这份构想最妙的地方在哪里？你在买枪的时候费用不会拖累你。费用已经被涵盖在弹药采购里了：第一个5年5美分，此后每5年都会减少费用直至降低到2美分为止。州政府从中获得的收入将大大有助于处理案件，加强执法，心理健康检查、相关的训练以及任何与这项法案有关的花费。

Before you tell me how I am violating your rights by proposing a record of gun owners, note that the constitution does not say that you have the right to bear arms and not tell anyone. We regulate chemicals, elevators, airplanes, and financial transactions -- and none of those are specifically designed to kill other human beings.

在你告诉我我是怎么通过提议对持枪者记录在册而侵犯你的权利之前，你要记住，宪法只是赋予了你持枪的权利，可没说明不能将你持枪的事实公之于众。我们对化学药品、粮仓、机场和金融贸易都进行了管制，可没有一项管制措施是专门设计来害人性命的。

What I'm proposing isn't revolutionary -- it's common sense. It falls in the middle of some really crazy arguments on all sides, exactly where so many of us in this country are, too. But nonetheless, some will say that I'm using this crisis as a political opportunity to push my leftist agenda. This is a cheap and craven line to get out of a tough and necessary conversation. The fact is that, without fresh blood on the ground, no one is listening. We have to have these discussions while families are mourning. We have to care about this beyond prayer, empathy, and hand-wringing. We have to actually make change.

我的提议并不新鲜，只是共识而已。它处在了一些在任何方面都是极其不可理喻的争执中央，正如我们之中的大多数人所处在这个国家的位置中一样。尽管如此，有些人还是会利用这个危机作为他们的政治机遇来推行他们的激进议题。对于必须进行的艰难而又必要的磋商而言，这是低俗的懦夫所为。事实是，没有新鲜的血液加入到商讨中的话，没人会倾听这些议题。还有家庭在哀悼着，我们必须得推行这些谈话了，不能只把我们的关心局限在祈祷、同情和绝望这些层面。我们必须做出些实际的变革了。

It's time to be reasonable. It's time to respect each others' lives as much as we respect each others' rights. It's time to require training and screening for all firearms.
时候变得理智些了，是时候尊重他人的生命就像我们尊重他们的权利那样了，是时候要求对所有持枪者进行训练和筛查了。


本文作者：Shawn Justin VanDiver

Navy veteran and Co-Director of the Truman National Security Project San Diego Chapter   海军老兵、杜鲁门国家安全项目圣迭戈版的合著主编