Grace IspasContributing writer
With the dozens of shootings that have happened recently in the United States, many Americans have turned to the idea of gun laws as the solution to this regretful situation. Each time the news unfolds, Americans all around the country were glued to their televisions watching with horror and sympathy for those affected – myself included. However, most of the people who committed these atrocities obtained these firearms illegally. Why would that change if gun control laws were passed? Did laws stop the bootleggers during the prohibition? Do they stop the drug dealers today?
The Bills Of Rights, ratified in 1791, were the first and some of the most important amendments to the United States Constitution. Never has there been so much debate about any of these amendments as the continual talk of “gun control.” The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Congruent with the beliefs of those stated many years ago, I believe the greatest effect of this so-called “gun control” will facilitate the vulnerability of law-abiding citizens. The law, if changed, will only affect the law-abiding citizens of the country – not the criminals, gang members, nor the mentally ill. No criminal has ever been stopped from their actions due to the laws set in place; the “gun control” laws will be no different.
Instead of comparing our country’s statistics with others we can simply look at the classic examples within our own boarders. Chicago, Ill., which is known to have some of the strictest gun laws in America, has also been known as one of the most dangerous and deadliest cities in America – even topping all other Alpha cities of the world. Comparing Chicago’s statistics with those of the most “gun friendly” city in America – Houston, Texas – you will see that there are about half as many homicides. I believe these two cities, with more than 2 million people each, provide “real-world,” tangible evidence that local gun laws are meaningless and this so-called “gun control” is not what the country needs.
My viewpoint is not to say that restrictions should not be in place. Yes, there should be a wait period for gun purchases and yes, there should be background checks and yes, I can even agree with psychological testing of individuals wanting to purchase a gun, but I can never agree with taking the guns away from the American citizens.
I am not agreeing with the idea that the average American citizen is in need of any kind of assault rifle, but handguns and hunting rifles should be permissible. I feel that the average American citizen chooses to own a gun for the means of protection or personal enjoyment, being that of hunting or club membership, not of malicious intent.
Moreover, no government that supplies other countries with weapons should tell their tax-paying society they are not allowed to own personal weapons to protect their own home. The American people cannot be forced to turn in their guns and still call themselves free.