If someone thinks guns are necessary for self-defense, they are part of the problem. Fighting violence with violence is a Western colonizer way of thinking, and there are better ways to solve the world’s violence issues.
The Kyle Rittenhouse case took place during a time where we had the deadliest school shooting since 2018, where gun violence is rising at record rates and amdist a deadly pandemic that has become so politicized I sometimes feared for another civil war.
After the riots and protests in 2020, I came to a realization. People were resorting to violence because they felt like nothing else was working, nothing else was getting the structural, integral and industrial change this country needs to survive.
In refusing to change, our country has failed us. Our country has failed Black people, Indigenous people, Asians and Pacific Islanders, LGBTQ+ people and so many more minority groups who suffer under our racist and outdated systems. And mass violence is a result of that failure.
The Rittenhouse case had the ability to signify change, to set a precedent and update the system. But again, our justice system failed to change.
Failing to see the danger people with guns pose is the view of those who are privileged, brainwashed, ignorant, or all three. Even Rittenhouse admitted he was scared of what he or others could do with the weapon he illegally carried.
During his testimony, Rittenhouse said he chose the AR-15 style weapon because he couldn’t legally carry a pistol and because it “looked cool.”
If someone is choosing to carry a gun, especially one larger than what they need, f because it “looks cool” they are in the wrong. They should not have access to any weapons, much less guns. If Rittenhouse was really concerned with his actions being legal, he wouldn’t have had the gun in the first place.
Rittenhouse also admitted his life was in danger because he had the weapon and Joseph Rosenbaum, who had no weapon and who Rittenhouse shot, was pursuing him.
“If I would have let Mr. Rosenbaum take my firearm from me, he would have used it and killed me with it and probably killed more people,” Rittenhouse said.
Testimony from Drew Hernandez, a right-wing internet personality who covered the demonstrations, said the rioters tried to start conflict with anyone who obviously had a gun once they were seen.
The weapon Rittenhouse carried had the potential to be as equally dangerous to him as it was to the three men he shot. And each of those shots, whether the people they hit were Black or not, turned into a symbol of racism, inequality and unnecessary violence.
If Rittenhouse didn’t have that gun, he might not have become a target, and the night may have only ended with bruises instead of death.
People who justify Rittenhouse’s actions are likely the same people who justify dropping two atomic bombs on Japan’s civilian-filled cities after they destroyed only one of our military ports. The overwhelming violence is completely unnecessary, and unless change starts to come around, it will only continue.
Educate yourself on what people in minority communities really go through, put yourself in their shoes and then see how well you like living in America. Watch how pointless all this violence is under a system that continues to oppress people who deserve equality just as much as white people do.
Start by reading about topics like Afrofuturism, Indigenous history, Asian culture and other ways of the world. Learn about cultures which are not your own, and learn about culture beyond the surface level of tourism. Dig deep to gain real knowledge and understanding.
Encourage change, vote for change and embody change. Because America can be better than the cycle of violence we are in now.
Anteia McCollum can be reached at [email protected]
Regnar3S
First off the 2A states: "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." You may not like the 2A but it is because of the 2A that keeps the government in check and hopefully the crime rate in check. As the editor in chief I find your comments disheartening as an American. As you advocate for tighter gun laws and probably the destruction of the 2A, have you seen the direct effects of people who cannot defend themselves from criminals or the government? It is because of the 2A that we don't have rampant crime and government suppression. I would propose that if you do not like the 2A, try and live in a country where having guns for protection is illegal, and the closest police is 8-10 min away, and the government could really care less if you are protected or not. Without the 2A this scenario of highly plausible. When the 2A was written the right to bear arms was not so people can dear hunt or pheasant hunt. It was drafted so the people could be defenders of themselves against the government and also their person and property. In the Declaration of Independence it is stated that we are given unalienable rights, Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" and which governments are created to protect. But when the government does not protect these for all people, it is the responsibility of the people to protect these rights and to re-establish a government that will protect these rights. You look at many countries that do not allow people to carry weapons, and their governments can almost do what they want because they don't fear the people and criminals do not follow gun laws so crime is rising. You asses this teenager who was carrying a rifle as the enemy of the state, where at the very same moment rioters were destroying businesses, infringing on another persons right to life, liberty and happiness. This teen (thought in my opinion should not have been there to begin with) wasn't out trying to deter people's rights as in the rioters destruction and anarchy, he wanted to protect others people rights. The 2A helps makes this country what it is today, deterring people from taking our God given rights from us. But until people who are advocating for stricter laws on guns live and see actual government tyranny, and good citizens not able to protect themselves, they will never understand the purpose of the 2A. I would invite you to step into the shoes of those who cannot protect themselves or live in fear of the government, and let me know how progressive talks go instead of the violence they impose on you. I would also like to say many of your articles are very one sided, I have not read a piece from the Argonaut that shows opposing views. This is not real journalism in my mind when all the articles are one sided or left leaning. Please work on becoming a more rounded paper, seeing the stories from all sides instead of how you want the students to view their world. Thanks :)