Can Evil Be Banned?
What really is Evil, and is there any way that it can be stopped? True evil looks like something that happened recently at a concert in Las Vegas where a gunman opened fired onto a crowd of innocent people from the 32nd floor in the Mandalay Bay Hotel. According to an article published on USA Today by Alan Gomez and Kaila White called “Here are all the victims of the Las Vegas shooting” the shooting resulted in the deaths of 58 people, and left 489 people wounded. This number is disgusting to most people, and would also be described by most as “Evil”. Every time a mass shooting occurs, the debate about gun control starts all over again. Although gun control has little to no effect, the United States could benefit from a potential limitation or ban on bump stocks, which is a modification used to use force from the recoil to cause weapons to act as an automatic weapon. This is due to automatic firearms being banned, in which modifications that make semi-automatic weapons act as automatic in which should be limited.
An article written by Jason Silverstein on Daily News called “NRA’s Wayne LaPierre spreads blame for Las Vegas shooting but won’t back any gun control bills” talks about the different accusations that LaPierre is making towards other people when it comes to the Las Vegas shooting. The article also focuses on the over political discussion of banning “bump stocks” in which cause the recoil of the firearm to turn a semi-automatic weapon into something close to an automatic weapon. The author finds it hypocritical of LaPierre to be calling others out for the shooting when he is the one that supports gun rights. LaPierre seems to be taking things out of proportion when he starts blaming others for these such acts, such as when he blames the Obama Administration, who legalized bump stocks in 2010. They ruled this out due to it not to be considered a weapon modification to make it fully automatic. These findings after the mass shooting shed new light on the potential of these “bump stocks”. We can see that a potential ban of the bump stock may be useful after seeing what it can potentially due such as in the Las Vegas mass shootings.
An article written by Matthias Gafni called “Where Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock bought his guns; it was all legal” talks about all of the different locations that the Las Vegas shooter had purchased all of his firearms. Gafni talks about the massive number of firearms he obtained over the course of a year. Gafni found that all of the firearms were purchased legally, and there is no limit to firearm purchase. At the New Frontier Armory, the owner Famiglietti commented on the background check process when the Las Vegas shooter had come through his store. He stated: “My staff takes their job very seriously, and if there were any red flags during this transaction, like any other, it would be halted immediately.”. Throughout this article Gafni seems to be pointing out that the way the shooter was able to purchase these guns was much too easy. Gafni is correct to some degree but, the background check process is one that is strict, and has been increasing over the years. There would have been no sign that he would have committed this mass shooting whatsoever. If the shooter didn’t have access to the so called “bump stocks” he may have not been able to devastate to this extreme.
An article written by Harry Bruinius and Patrik Jonsson called “Why gun experts don’t support banning — or buying — ‘bump stocks’” is about the two authors talking with those that are against the banning of these “bump stocks”. Throughout many of the interviews, one of the major arguments the authors noted when interviewing Paul Valone, who is the president of Grassroots North Carolina, which is a gun rights organization states that bump stocks “are an amusement, because they don’t under normal circumstances turn an AR-15 or another rifle into a killing machine, because you can’t hit anything with it.” Another person that was interviewed in this article was Larry Pratt, who is the director of Gun Owners of America, in which he states that “the Las Vegas mass shooting is a very unusual situation in many ways, because the bump-stock, this is the first time anybody has ever heard of it being used this way.”. His overall view is that gun control advocates will use the idea of banning “bump stocks” as a way to escalate it to more and more firearm regulations. The first major argument used about bump stocks not being accurate, or reliable is false when it comes to shooting into a massive crowd of 600 people. According to an article from the New York Times called “What Is a Bump Stock and How Does It Work?” one of the firearms used in the Las Vegas shooting was found to have shot 90 shots in 10 seconds, where as a fully automatic firearm shot 98 shots in 7 seconds. This is very close to the weapon used that was equipped with a “bump stock”. Accuracy is not the main goal when shooting into such a large group of people, the rate of fire is. However, Pratt brings up a good point when talking about this leading to more gun control in the future, but banning such things as “bump stocks” would even be tough in congress, let alone banning more things that would completely violate the second amendment.
The unfortunate events that occurred in Las Vegas should never happen again. By limiting the “bump stocks”, we can hopefully prevent a semi-automatic weapon from being similar to that of an automatic weapon, in which they have been banned since 1986. This can hopefully provide for a safer America, that still holds the values of the second amendment.