First, I think it's important to explain what the 2nd amendment actually says: "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." This is directly referring to the military. Our 2nd amendment right tells us we can create a militia that bears arms for our country's defense, not that each individual person has the right to a handheld gun in their home, and certainly not assault rifles. That being said, I still believe that we should be allowed to have our own guns for self-defense and recreational purposes. However, as Uncle Ben said in Spiderman, "with great power comes great responsibility". There are things we need to keep in mind.
The United States has, by far, the highest number of gun violence occurrences in the smallest amount of time, than any other developed country in the world, even when adjusted for population size. And the window of time between each mass shooting has been getting smaller and smaller in the past few years. The most frequent and worst acts of gun violence that occur in the U.S. are homicide and suicide. Many people believe that these occurrences would still happen if guns were outlawed or highly regulated, because criminals don't care about laws and are able to obtain guns illegally. But it's a terrible idea to say that there's no point in having regulations and laws, simply because some people will be able to get around those laws. Ignoring the problem is just as bad as handing a known mentally unstable person a gun, knowing he has plans to shoot up a school. Yes, some people will obtain guns illegally, but it is far more likely that some plans will be thwarted by the regulation of guns. And did you know that, in countries with stricter gun laws, and where there are fewer guns out on the streets, there are also fewer deaths related to guns? It's because it's hard to illegally obtain a gun when there are strict laws on gun trade, so many people aren't able to get ahold of one. Then some people say, well, if that's so, then criminals will just use other means to commit their crimes. Yes, that's true, but guns are the deadliest, most widely available weapon that is legal here in the U.S. If a criminal chooses a different weapon, which is less deadly than a gun, it's likely that more victims will survive. It's the same with the suicide problem here in the U.S. So many people who are depressed enough to try to commit suicide are doing it because of a temporary issue in their lives. If they use a gun to try to kill themselves, they will most likely be successful, but if they use a less deadly weapon, they may survive and get a second chance. To top it all off, crime in general isn't even that much higher in the U.S. than in other countries (adjusted to population size); our crimes are just more deadly.
I agree people should be able to own a gun if they want, as long as it is used as protection for themselves and their family, or for recreational purposes; however, we need rules and training. It's a firearm, for goodness sake. It's extremely lethal and should be treated with respect, but so many people don't think they need the training or precautions. Did you know that a victim of an armed burglary is much more likely to be killed by his/her own gun than by a gun brought in by the criminal? That's because so many people own guns but don't have proper training, so when they pull out their own guns to thwart the enemy, the enemy then is able to get ahold of that gun and kill or injure the homeowner with his/her own gun, and if that gun hadn't been there, or if the homeowner had been properly trained to handle the gun, the death or injury is likely to have never happened. Furthermore, in developed countries, the more guns in a country, the more gun deaths, not the more lives saved by guns. But as I've said a few times already, I'm not opposed to people owning their own handheld guns. (Assault rifles are a whole other story.) But we need gun reform, and that's as close to a fact as an opinion gets.
In the top developed countries in the world, where there are much fewer instances of gun violence, there are regulations in place that make sense. For example, as for Canada, Norway, Germany, New Zealand, Australia, and Ireland, if you want to buy a gun, you have to obtain a license and registration, give a valid reason for your necessity of owning a gun, undergo gun safety training, and prove that you are willing and able to store the gun in a safe place. In the U.S, you don't have to do any of these things. Of course, every state's laws are different, but many states don't even require a background check, or for you to report missing firearms if your gun is lost or stolen. And don't even think about the U.S. requiring people to pass a psychological evaluation before obtaining a firearm. These are the kinds of things that need to change. Many of the deadliest criminals have been deemed mentally unstable, have a record of violence, and have been under investigation by government entities like the FBI, before they obtain a gun and commit heinous acts of violence. And if gun laws were stricter, whoever sold them their guns would have known not to do so based on their state of mind and background check. The Guardian has some information about lack of gun regulations and loopholes in gun laws in the United States: https://www.theguardian.com/world/us-news-blog/2013/jan/16/gun-laws-need-to-know.
And criminals aren't even the only problem when it comes to gun violence. There are accidents involving guns every year, some of which affect children. What harm could some training on how to use a gun, and how to safely store a gun, do? If we have to obtain a license and undergo training to drive a car, and if we regulate what we can do when driving a car and operating other machinery, then why don't we have the same laws for firearms? Both are great responsibilities and should be taken seriously. What's more is these laws won't keep law-abiding citizens from obtaining a gun. That's what so many people are worried about - how much harder it will be to obtain a gun if gun reform happens. Well, if you are a law-abiding citizen with good intentions, then you have nothing to worry about. You will have to take some extra steps for your safety and the safety of the people around you, but you will get to buy your gun. Very few people are trying to make it so that it's impossible for law-abiding citizens to buy guns. We all know that, if good people are armed, it's more difficult for a criminal to get away with a crime, but most people don't arm themselves anyway.
I got a lot of my information from compilations of studies that were detailed in a video that Vox made: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX4qUsgHa4Y. There is much more information in this video, and it's probably explained better than I can explain it, so take a look. Yes, U.S. citizens should be able to bear arms, but let's be safe and smart about it. It's only common sense, and there's too much at stake to just ignore a problem as big as this one.
I'd like to also point out that religion is the reason for most of the violence, mass shootings, and war in the world, so saying we need more religion to make this country better is like drinking arsenic and then arguing that you need to drink more arsenic to reverse the effects of the first swig of arsenic.
They might not work in random cities in the U.S, like Detroit, but that's because it's just that city that has gun laws. Detroit's citizens can just go to the next city over to buy guns easily and use them anywhere they'd like. If we have strict gun laws that are nationwide, we will be more like Australia.
No comments:
Post a Comment