3 years ago1,000+ Views
Hey newsies. We’ve been having some really awesome conversations this week, and I’d like to continue with some thought-provoking issues.
Last week we talked about the Syrian Refugee Crisis, and many people brought up some really excellent points. Let’s keep the ball rolling with another interesting topic.

Gun Control in the U.S.

Here’s a wrap-up of what’s happening now.
Since 2013 there have been 864 mass shootings in the US. One of the most recent ones was of cameraman Adam Ward and reporter Alison Parker, who were shot while they were on the job.
Another, that took place this week at Delta State University, where a professor reportedly shot and killed an assistant professor at the university, along with his girlfriend, before killing himself.
Some argue the issue at hand is mental health and awareness. But the main subject brought up after these shootings: gun control.

Do you think the United States has strict enough gun laws and regulation?

Do you think the more available the gun, the more likely it is to cause violent crime? Or do you think that criminals will find a way to obtain guns despite it being more difficult?

Is this a federal or state issue?

I’m interested to hear your thoughts. Let’s all try to respect and learn from each other’s opinions! :)
@mansamirdh While I am inclined to agree with you point on murders that involve only the perpetrator and a single victim are not likely to be reduced simply by tighter gun control, I disagree with you with regard to mass shootings. If you're intent on murdering one person, and you're of that personality type, I have no doubt that the lack of availability of a gun will stop you. There are plenty of other ways to end someones life, sadly. Evidence does however support where access to automatic and semi automatic weapons is prevented, the type of mass shootings that seem to becoming more and more frequent in the US will become more difficult. As I mentioned in my post above, those type of mass killings in Australia, where gun control of those type of weapons has been enforced it has eradicated those type of events. I accept the two countries are different, but even a reduction of mass murders to me seems worthy of some action
wow, even cops? I know we have a negative view on cops right now (that’s another issue for discussion), but they are out there risking their lives as their job... @VinMcCarthy
I think we should have super strict gun control. take them away from everyone. nobody but the military should have guns. not even cops.
Ok, I am all for tighter gun control, and here's why. I understand in the US you've always had the right to bear arms, and some people will never relinquish that right. We had similar issues here in Australia, we are a land based on convicts, and similar to the way the US grew, this was a wild country in periods of its past when owning a gun was a primary means of protection. Similarly to the US gun laws in Australia didn't keep up with developments in gun technology, and people were able to own many varieties of assault rifle and fast firing multi shot weapons which go way beyond anything required for hunting or home protection. A period of mass shootings using this type of weapon culminated in a mass killing of 35 people with a further 23 badly wounded. The government reacted to this by issuing a ban and buy back of semi automatic rifles, semi automatic shotguns and pump action shotguns. It also introduced strict licensing on all other guns, including a comprehensive background check and gun education scheme for those who wanted to keep any type of gun. Those who didn't wish to go through these checks and registration also had the opportunity for their guns to be submitted for buyback by the government until the end of 1997. Bearing in mind Australia has a tiny population, in that period about 650,000 guns were submitted for buyback. Since then not only have mass shooting incidents stopped ( from 13 separate incidents in the years 1979 - 1996, to ZERO since 1996), but also the suicide rate, by any means has dropped by 70%. Yes, it is people who kill people, but if you limit the access to the tools to kill, you limit their ability to kill. It's a hell of a lot easier to control a guy with a knife than it is to contol a guy with a gun that can kill 10's of people is seconds. I am not saying ban all guns in the US, that's pointless and it wouldn't work - very few would comply. The right to bear arms was written into the constitution when a 6 shooter was the height of gun technology. Time and technology move on, laws nees to move with it.
@InPlainSight that makes sense. I'm not exactly a Constitutional Law expert, but there are some arguments being made that gun control laws can coincide with the Constitution. Since it specifies militias, it seems that the spirit of the law is that it protects people that need to defend themselves, who band together. It was never intended to protect lone shooters. Granted, needing to register with an approved militia seems like a strong barrier preventing gun ownership. But that doesn't mean it's impossible to come to an agreement that we can all accept. We've seen that limiting access to guns has worked very well in other countries- you can't have a mass shooting without a gun to shoot. It's that simple. We've amended the constitution to be more inclusive (including granting the right to vote to people who are nonwhite and/or female), and we passed the Patriot Act despite the fact that it violates the right to privacy, and the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Gun violence is a threat to the most important right of all: the right to life. We need to be able to defend ourselves, but we also need to be able to ensure that those that aren't able to defend themselves won't have to. The solution to that isn't more gun ownership. We can't have militias outside of every school, movie theater, mall, and home.
View more comments