Against Gun Control – Aeden Riggs

America was built on war with the British and with certain unalienable rights at its core; many modern ideas were created in the founding documents.  However, there is one clause that is debated to a great extent in the U.S. Constitution: the Second Amendment, which guarantees American citizens the right to possess firearms and other weapons.  Many Americans have felt the issue on a personal level, such as the Las Vegas shooting, and come to the conclusion that there should be more gun control.  They want to restrict guns to a reasonable point in which mass shootings will theoretically stop.  This, even though it would be nice, is impossible.  To be perfectly honest, there will never be a country as large as ours without mass killings.  There are gun control measures that make sense, such as background checks and psychological evaluations.  However, banning firearms such as the Colt AR-15 is illegal because there is a second part to the Second Amendment we often miss.

In the Constitution, we have the right to form well regulated militias that should have the ability to effectively resist external and internal professional armies.  While trying to prevent weapons from falling into the hands of militant groups such as white supremacists and anarcho-communists.  There have been militias that have been active, such as in the Bundy standoff, where militias and the government pointed their guns at each other and geared up for a fight.  Luckily, nothing happened, but the militants were never punished because it is their legal right to do so.  Now, if it is a legal right to have a militia and own weapons, then how is it legal to restrict magazine capacity to only ten rounds?  Small arms generally have twenty to thirty rounds per magazine in the military.  If a militia needed to fight a professional army such as Russia’s, then they will almost certainly need high-capacity magazines.  How is protecting the government or deposing tyranny possible with such laws?  It is legal and constitutionally sound to form militias and have weapons that support such an organization.

With that in consideration, it is imperative to understand that having no gun control is a foolish idea.  Background checks prevent dangerous criminals from getting weapons, and psychological evaluations, which could have prevented shootings like Las Vegas, are sound ideas that would stop the criminal and insane from possessing weapons.  There is one idea that scares me, however, and has no place in America. And that is a gun registry.  It works as Sen. Dianne Fienstein says, ‘like registering your car‘, which would allow the federal government to create a database of everyone owning a gun.  If I trusted the U.S. government, I would be okay with that, but I don’t trust the government, and not many people do.  If somebody in government wanted to target gun owners, they now have the power to do so.

Guns are weapons and need to be used responsibly and kept out of the hands of the wrong people.  Saying that we aren’t doing enough isn’t a ridiculous claim either, but a gun registry and over restriction of magazine capacity have no place here and are absolutely illegal in America.  Rather than simply banning guns, blaming the NRA, or doing a ‘mourn and forget’ for victims, we should stop the insane from arming themselves while promoting responsible gun ownership.  Only through education and prevention can we stop mass killings; no ban will ever stop the evil from killing with what they have.

Pro Gun Control – Kaitlyn Waynick

It is appalling that the age-old gun control debate is still in question. Though the second amendment protects citizens’ right to own guns, we as Americans have proven over and over again that the availability of these weapons is a responsibility too great for us to handle. From the issues of mass murders to suicide, it is apparent that guns undoubtedly need be harder to acquire in the U.S.

Recently, American citizens’ spirits have been shattered after the news of the mass shooting in Las Vegas. Over 500 innocent people were injured, and 59 were killed. This havoc was wreaked by Stephen Paddock, who stashed 17 guns in his hotel room, which he used as his vantage point to shoot from. Information that is not as commonly known about this shooter is that all of the guns he possessed were purchased legally. Six of them were even bought from the same store. This begs the question, why was there no investigation into this man’s purchases? Is it not suspicious that someone would need to buy 17 guns? As tragic as this event was, it is not the first time something similar to this has happened. Omar Mateen, the Pulse Nightclub shooter, legally purchased his gun from a store near his home, even though he had formerly been on two terrorist watch lists. This plainly shows how lax and feeble the vetting system is for gun owners in America.

While mass shootings generate the most media attention and awareness when it comes to gun-related killings, suicide accounts for more than 60% of these deaths. According to The Washington Post, suicide rates have reached a three-decade high, 50% of them being gun-related. It is a well-known fact that guns provide the most lethal way to commit suicide. The lethality percentage of suicide by gun (according to the Harvard School of Public Health) is 82.5%, whereas the percentages for means such as drowning, hanging, or poison are all under 66%. On top of this, it is easy for someone to acquire a gun, making firearms a simple way for one to end his or her own life. If it took more time to get a gun, or even if someone were deemed depressed and not allowed to own one, the rates of suicide would decrease drastically. Studies show that 50% of the people who kill themselves make the decision to do so in a span of 20 minutes. If it took weeks, or even months, to purchase a gun, people contemplating suicide would be given more time to decide to live. According to CNN, when a law was passed in Washington D.C. to extend the waiting time to purchase a gun, suicide rates in the area went down by 2.2%. On the other hand, when South Dakota repealed their waiting period law, suicide rates increased by 7.6%.

While it is understandable that people would like to own guns for personal reasons such as hunting or shooting for sport, it is not unreasonable that they should have to go through a more rigorous process to obtain these weapons. Yes, it may be a hassle and take some time. However, if putting in a little extra work is what it takes to keep murderers from having easy access to guns and to prevent depressed people from making the decision to end their lives, then it is worth it. Human lives are more important than the accessibility of a gun- they always have been, and they always will be. Now it is time to protect the citizens of our country and enact a stricter gun control policy.