It seems that dark times arise in the United States often.
The city of Las Vegas was encompassed with sadness in yet another gun-related incident in early October. With what seems like so many tragedies, it can be difficult to think and reflect on a topic that is so divisive.
Shootings are a recurring cause of death in the U.S. when counting several mass shootings, and the hundreds of Americans murdered one or more at a time. According to the FBI, over 8,000 gunshot homicides were recorded in 2014 alone. When this number is compared with other developed countries, especially in Europe, it is found that more people are shot and killed in the U.S. than any other advanced country. None of these countries, England, Germany, the Netherlands, Finland to mention a few, come close to the amount of gun homicide when compared to the U.S. This poses a huge question: is anyone safe?
The U.S. has witnessed several gun-related incidents, which have produced significant historical analysis and legislation.
In 1963, President John F Kennedy was shot and killed with a rifle. This incident prompted the development of the Gun Control Act of 1968 which placed regulations in the acquiring and use of guns. Through the years, this act has been enhanced and the National Instant Criminal Background Check System was created in 1993 to prevent the sales of firearms to prohibited persons. After all of these prevention strategies, gun violence is still continues to rise in the U.S.
The debate about gun control and the second amendment has been a crucial issue — one that will soon reach a boiling point. In the past five years, there have been more than three significant gun related homicides, and each time the gun control debate comes up. Yet, nothing is done about it. The question on everyone’s mind is, why has the government refused to ban guns?
The government, however, cannot simply place a ban on guns. Just as one side of the fight states, the government is required to obey the Constitution as the supreme law of the land. According to the Second Amendment, there is a restriction that the government shall not infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
Though the government has been infringing on this act, there is a limit to how far it can infringe. Placing a gun ban will violate the constitution on so many counts. So, why not repeal the second amendment? There are far too many nuances to the issue to simply repeal such a strongly held amendment.
Gun control has become a national debate. Although I understand the need to adhere to the Constitution, I am pro-gun control. I believe guns are not necessarily needed for societal peace. And without gun control, the lives of many humans will be lost for absolutely unnecessary reasons. Imagine for a second if gun control was in effect the unfortunate tragedy in Sandy Hook Elementary would have been averted. The topic of gun control cannot further be overemphasized.
Gun control is essential for a safe place for us to live in. Without it, a gun can easily land in the wrong hands. Who knows the horrors that are inbound if that happens?
History has thought us many things, and one of those is the need for more regulations on guns. Unfortunately, as long as gun control still remains just a “debate,” gun-related deaths and possibly another mass shooting is inevitable.
Caleb Chibuike can be reached at [email protected]
Rob Myers (@MyStudentApt)
Mr. Chibuike has done virtually no research (understanding this is an opinion column, opinions should still be informed, lest they be worthless), and gets a number of things wrong, which isn't surprising. "After all of these prevention strategies, gun violence is [sic] still continues to rise in the U.S." No, gun violence has not continued to rise since 1993, it's gone down. "Imagine for a second if gun control was in effect the unfortunate tragedy in Sandy Hook Elementary would have been averted." Pray tell, how? The guilty party stole the guns used in the horrendous act. How would a law have stopped him? The perpetrator of the Las Vegas shooting passed multiple federal background checks and acquired his guns legally. Mr. Chibuike has a childlike wonder of the adult world, where "they" (read liberal pols) have it all figured out; they just get thwarted by dastardly villains like the NRA, and Conservatives. The left could solve all gun crime via laws if only they were allowed, but the "bitter clingers" won't let them. For shame. Except that none of it is true, and part of being an adult and forming adult opinions is realizing one lives in an imperfect world where bad people do bad things for incomprehensible reasons. One can advocate for "doing something" to address the issue and manage to not affect it one whiff, while causing all manner of collateral damage. I'd like to help Mr. Chibuike with a short primer if I may: There are over 300 million guns in existence, inside the country, now. The government has no idea who owns them, where they are, or when they change hands between private citizens. The task of forcibly registering/seizing/destroying/buying back, etc... is impossible. The 2nd Amendment is in place as a deterrent against government tyranny. While there is little chance of such tyranny returning in the foreseeable future, that doesn't change the reason for its existence, or for its widespread popularity. The 2A will not be repealed or infringed within our lifetimes, if ever. The number of states necessary to agree will not be reached this century. Laws restricting the transfer of guns between parties is impossible to enforce since you don't know who owned what weapons before such a law would take place. Without enforcement, what's the point? While the number of guns per person in the country have risen over the last 30 years, gun homicides have gone down. I get it. It's a scary world and no one likes living with the knowledge that one could be sitting at a cafe' and a madman could open fire. And the last thing you want to hear is that there's no way to stop it, or even dent the likelihood, via government action. But it is the truth.