A Case for Common Sense Gun Control
The culture of guns has always been one with the American identity, and that (for better or for worse) will realistically never change. Gun Control often culminates in great hostilities between opposing views, but that does not mean that the topic should never be discussed. In fact, it can be argued that it is more important than ever to have the discussion in the wake of yet another terrible shooting in Las Vegas.
To begin understanding my stance on Gun Control, it is vital to remember one point in the course of this article: I do not oppose the limited right of a citizen to own a firearm for their protection. With the level of guns owned already in the country, it would be impossible to lift each and every gun from the population, and thus it is important for citizens to assure their safety by purchasing something to help them adequately defend themselves. If that is a simple firearm like a handgun, so be it.
Rather than speaking strictly about my views, I will first be creating a critique of what I consider the most common arguments against any Gun Control legislation. Afterwards, I will articulate what I believe would be an appropriate step forward in the Gun Ownership issue.
1. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people
This is probably the first argument that gets brought up in this debate every time it comes up in conversation, and I have to admit that I have never understood the supposed merit behind the argument. Yes, people do shoot people, but the instrument by which they shoot the victim is, indeed, a gun. This is simply deflection to try and minimize the impact that guns have on our society.
2. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun
We can thank the NRA for popularizing this saying, and likewise for spreading misinformation into our populace. The issue with this claim is purely regarding real-world evidence: of 160 active shootings identified by the FBI from 2000 to 2013, only one was stopped by an armed civilian. This illustrates just how inefficient most “good people with guns” tend to be in real life situations. Additionally, people having guns in active shooter situation proves to be more problematic than helpful, as even more casualties can take place outside of the damage done by the initial perpetrator.
3. Shouldn’t we be focusing more on mental health instead of gun control?
It is not wrong to assert that we need to spend more time on mental health programs in the US, as the programs in place are quite frankly abhorrent. However, it is another case of deflection in not taking into account the pure amount of casualties that we experience at the hands of people who own guns, whether they are mentally ill or not. It has even been reported that the Las Vegas shooter had no existing mental health issues, and had obtained all of his guns legally. If that doesn’t signal a need for change in how firearms are obtained by the general populace, I don’t know what does.
4. Taking guns away from law abiding citizens puts them in the hands of criminals
Per the LA Times, we must understand that if this logic is applied to make Gun Control illegitimate, then why should we have any laws whatsoever? This leads to a slippery slope that would ultimately lead to anarchy, and does not take into account the empirical reality of needing to address gun violence via some form of gun control.
A Response in Ode to the Social Contract Theory
The Social Contract is a theory mainly developed by Thomas Hobbes in the 17th century. In this, Hobbes characterizes a State of Nature as a “State of War” wherein hostility runs abound, and thus the need for a creation of a civil society is warranted in order to escape from the State of Nature. While I would take issue with Hobbes’s ultimate goal of absolute monarchy, I generally agree with the framework of social contract theory. We, as citizens, give up some individual freedoms in order to gain safety through a government’s protection.
In conjunction with this theory, I believe there is a valuable lesson to take away in respect to Guns and Gun Control: by abiding unto the protection of the US government, we are subject to the forfeiture of some freedoms that we might otherwise have in the State of Nature. Furthermore, I assert that the government ought to exercise this part of the bargain in light of the most recent shooting. We need better restrictions on assault weapons. A weapon registration needs to be established. We need universal background checks for potential buyers of firearms.
Defense Against Tyranny
Those in opposition to my line of thinking might say that we are giving into the possibility of tyranny by giving up this freedom to the government, but I would assert that they exercise this supposed “tyranny” every day, and they aren’t quite as universally tyrannical as they are made out to be. The government enacts traffic and safety belt laws to make us safer. The government limits the amount of opioids you can carry at one time to make us safer. I believe it falls in line with this reasoning that they ought to regulate guns to the same end. The ironic part of those examples lies in that their purpose isn’t to take the life of another living thing, whereas a gun is intended expressly for that purpose.
Just as well, we can take leads from other countries across the globe that have dramatically decreased the level of violence in their countries by enacting the very reforms I have laid out. We have to stop identifying as this “chosen nation” of people, and learn from past examples of overbearing Nationalism. Just as well, we can see that there are many countries who have enacted such legislation that are not being “tyrannized” as the aforementioned opponents would want us to think.
In Summation:
Something must change. We have to understand that gun violence ought not to be common talk in a society, and thus we must take steps in order to curb such violence. We cannot write off gun violence as a necessary evil, as while it is absolutely evil, it is certainly less than necessary. Guns will never leave our culture completely, but it is morally irresponsible to claim that there is no action possible to avoid the level of gun violence prevalent in our nation.
