In the wake of yet another mass shooting, the topic of gun control has become a hot debate again. I for one have always been in favor of a liberal interpretation of the second amendment, as I subscribed to the idea this particular freedom has set us apart from other countries and made us truly capable of defending ourselves from oppression.
However, this decade has started a trend—a fad even—of mass shootings on a scale unheard of in a first world country like the U.S.. To me, the concept of owning certain weapons is trumped by the need to protect our countrymen’s lives and establish a sense of order. This has begun to change my mind on gun control, and while I do not support a general gun ban, I do believe assault weapons have run out their welcome in this country, and gun control in general needs to be tightened.
Aric Jenkins of Time puts it into perspective, “Six of the 10 deadliest mass shootings in the U.S. over the past decade have used an AR-15-style semi-automatic rifle.”
This includes the recent Parkland shooting, as well as Las Vegas, Orlando and Sandy Hook. Sure, a person can be easily killed with any kind of firearm, but weapons with the potential to kill dozens in seconds and require next to no skill to use are just too dangerous to have in circulation with the general populace.
Would enacting a ban on assault weapons stop mass shootings? Of course not.
Like opponents of gun control love to say, there will always be a way for those determined enough to gain possession of one, and even if this is not the case, they might opt for other types of guns instead.
The goal here is not to eliminate shootings entirely though. This would be impossible. Instead, we should focus on reducing them as much as we can, and ban weapons providing no practical use a shotgun, revolver, or normal rifle could not provide is the most obvious first choice to make.
In fact, there is already precedent for this. In 1994, Congress passed a 10-year ban on assault weapons; the Federal Assault Weapons Ban made it unlawful for the manufacture and purchase of certain guns and large-capacity magazines.
Christopher Ingraham from the Washington Post cites the book Rampage Nation by Louis Klarevas in his article when he said, “Compared with the 10-year period before the ban, the number of gun massacres during the ban period fell by 37 percent, and the number of people dying from gun massacres fell by 43 percent. But after the ban lapsed in 2004, the numbers shot up again — an astonishing 183 percent increase in massacres and a 239 percent increase in massacre deaths.”
This does not mean the ban is the only reason for the decrease, but it would be hard to argue it did not play a significant role. For those acting as if a similar ban would have no effect on mass shootings, I would simply point to the numbers. They do not lie.
To further prevent people from going on killing sprees, there should be a much more involved and regulated process in place when it comes to purchasing guns in general. While we do have some measures in place such as background checks, they do not adequately assess an individual.
Kate Taylor and Mary Hanbury for Business Insider use the Vegas shooter as an example of this. “All of Paddock’s purchases were completely legal. With no criminal record, Paddock would pass any background check. Nevada, where Paddock lived, does not impose any waiting period on gun purchases. The state allows anyone who is at least 18 years old to own a firearm and does not limit the number of guns a person can purchase in a single sale,” stated in their article.
Background checks are fine and dandy for keeping Felon Frank out of the gun store, but not everyone who wants to kill others does so with priors. The U.S. needs mental health screenings, waiting periods and rigorous licensing courses if it will ever minimize gun violence within its borders.
Some might feel we are giving away our rights or submitting to some draconian police state by enforcing such laws, and while I understand the reluctance to give up an already won liberty, I would counter by saying the second amendment was not written into the Bill of Rights with AR-15s and mass shootings in mind.
Things need to change, and only by willingly sacrificing for the greater good will ensure that this change comes.