Gun control and legislation really, really confuses me in the US. Why, after so many tragedies, do they not do anything? This is something I want to discuss as this genuinely perplexes me. So, I have some questions for you all:
Why do people need semi-automatic/automatic weapons?
I can kind of go along with the concept of having hand guns and shotguns etc. But why would you ever be in a situation where you would need a semi-automatic weapon as a civilian?
To be fair to both sides, I have read an article on the Armed Citizens Legal Defence Network inc. which you can find here. The gist of the article explains that the reason why ordinary people need semi-automatic guns is because of the second amendment. People need to be able to take down the government if they become tyrants… he argues that if other countries had armed citizens then events like the Holocaust would not have happened. Take from that what you will. There are many more facets to his article but I’ll let you peruse that yourself.
Personally, I’m going to take more convincing than that. When have you ever heard of a civilian using a semi-automatic weapon for good? Sure, there must be some cases that support that statement but do they outweigh the amount of incidents where there have been mass shootings as a result of access to semi-automatic weapons?
Why do Americans not react/try to change after a mass shooting?
I know it’s because, as a whole, this is too big an issue to tackle all in one go. But what will it take for them to change? I just want you all to watch this for a second.
It seems it is never the time to talk about gun control. After a mass shooting it’s not respectful to talk about gun control measures and between mass shootings the topic can be swept under the rug. But for how long? How long until there’s civil war? The US has been lucky so far that these attacks are largely carried out by a lone gunman (typically white, male) and not an organised group. It wouldn’t take much though. All the guns can be obtained legally after all. Why not target several places in the same town? They probably deserve it right? That young family just casually shopping in a supermarket or that young lady praying in Church, they all had it coming. Why? Oh, because they exist. No! This should not be the case. But with every mass shooting and every innocent person that dies just because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time raises the question: when does this end?
Now, this is where I will rant because I have never witnessed a more uncaring president. I resent every time he says he will ‘pray’ for the victims. I’m not saying he shouldn’t, prayer is a powerful thing, but that shouldn’t be all he does. It seems at this point like a throw-away line. If he’s praying for the victims then it’s OK. Why doesn’t he pray for the victims but also pray for guidance about how to tackle this issue? Instead of brushing it under the rug, consult with those on both sides of the argument and see if there is any middle ground at all. Do something, try something.
Far from helping with this issue Trump repealed the law put in place by Obama that stopped an estimated 75,000 people with mental disorders from owning a gun. Trump then, after the horrific shooting in Las Vegas that left 58 dead and hundreds more injured said this:
If this is a question of mental health then why repeal a piece of legislation that made it harder for people with mental disorders from owning a gun? Does this mean, if he’s not going to tackle gun control, that he will look into providing better mental health facilities and treatments? Because I don’t think he will. Also, this approach saying it’s mental health that is the biggest killer, although might be true for now in one sense, does not mean that everyone with a mental health disorder is going to go on a killing spree. I don’t feel this difference is ever fairly noted. Trump likes to speak in broad strokes (probably because he doesn’t understand intricacies).
I also want to talk about this quote from Trump where he says: gun-free zones are “target practice for the sickos and for the mentally ill.” There are many countries where guns are highly restricted. Take the UK for example here. We generally don’t have guns. Indeed, for every 100 people only 6.6 of them own a gun. We’ve had shootings sure, but not nearly as much. The terrible events at Dunblane thankfully, at the time of writing, is still the deadliest mass shooting the UK has ever experienced. The UK is far from a shooting gallery for the mentally ill. But the situation in the UK is vastly different to that in America. In the UK the majority of people wanted a tighter gun control measure to be put in place after the massacre in Dunblane. In the US, although there are those that want tougher measures, there is not a majority there yet. Also, there is the question of size. The UK is barely the size of one US state so it’s easier, not always, but generally easier for us to agree on the main points (lets not bring up Brexit). The states are all so different and vast, will there ever be a consensus on such an contentious issue?
I have one last question for you all. How many innocent people are going to have to die before gun control is fairly debated and tackled in the United States of America?
As always, happy to hear your views on this. Either side. Are you for or against gun control in the United States? Let me know in the comments below. Just please be respectful of others views and opinions.