Gun Violence and Gun Control
I wantto start out by saying that I am not a gun enthusiast or a gun collector and I haveno personal stake in this argument. Ijust want to bring up two points that seems to be lost in all of thefrustration and anger resulting from this debate. There are two questions we need to consider:
1. Wouldnew gun laws actually resolve the current problems?
2. Isthis recent rise in gun violence directly related to the abundance of guns?
1) GunLaws: There are two typesof gun control laws that could be enacted:
· Addextra criminal charges and more prison time when a gun is used in a crime.
· Eliminatepurchasing loopholes and make it much harder to purchase a gun.
Wealready have extremely strict penalties regarding using guns in criminalencounters. These laws help deter gunuse in certain types of crimes and I’m not opposed to adding stiffer sentencesto these crimes. However, a person intenton murder (or mass murders) is not going to be concerned about facing additionalyears in prison because he used a gun. Healready is facing the death penalty or life in prison.
Thisonly leaves the option of enacting laws designed to keep guns from these peoplein the first place. Apart from anyConstitutional arguments, is it even realistic to think that this wouldwork? Restricting gun access might workif the U.S. didn’t have many guns in the first place and we could restrict gunsfrom coming across our borders.
Evenif the U.S. didn’t have many guns, we would never be able to keep new guns fromcrossing our very porous borders. Remember,we are almost powerless in stopping drugs and illegal immigrants from crossingour borders. Even with all of oursecurity concerns after 9/11, we still have not been able to seal up theseborders.
As of2007, there were over 270 million civilian guns in the U.S (Small Arms Survey 2007 p. 67). We are not even talking about military or lawenforcement guns. Do we really thinkthat all of these civilian guns are owned by upstanding law-abidingcitizens? No, it is estimated that around75 to 100 million of these guns are owned by the criminal underworld or bypeople who could not pass the current background checks. In addition, millions of guns are currently availableon the black market. For all practicalpurposes, buying an illegal gun is just as easy as buying illegal drugs.
Yes,it is true that many of the recent high-profile shootings were done with gunsthat were purchased legally. However, isthat really the issue? Let’s say, forthe sake of argument, that we are able to enact laws that would completelyclose off all loopholes for the sales of legal guns. Only solid law-abiding citizens can nowpurchase guns. Let’s also say that wedon’t have over 230 thousand guns stolen from homes every year (Bureau of Justice Statistics, November8, 2012).
Do youreally think that a person who is bent on murder would have a moral dilemmaabout buying an illegal gun from the black market instead of through legalchannels? Unless you can effectivelyeliminate the sales of guns in the criminal under-world, new gun control lawswill be virtually ineffective. Yes, theselaws would make us feel good, but they would be unproductive.
2) Thereason for the recent gun violence:
Is ourrecent increase in gun violence a result of a recent surplus of guns? No, the United States has always had anabundance of guns, but we have not always had this level of violence or gunviolence. Violence, especially gunviolence has increased significantly over the past several decades. If the abundance of guns is not the source ofthis violence, what is the source?
Forwhatever reason, there has been a marked shift in the stability of oursociety. A large number of people are nowdeveloping a tendency toward violent outbursts. Their ability to control these outbursts also seems to be diminishing. In addition, a large number of people havetaken on the mindset that they don’t need to follow “normal socialbehavior.” What is causing this shift? I’m sure there are many factors involved inthis problem, but I would like to offer a partial explanation.
We areall governed by various sets of values. Some of these values are hard wired within us, such as the feeling thatit is wrong to lie, steal, rape, and murder. Other values have been instilled in us by ourparents, schools, and community, such as work ethics, cultural expectations,etc. As we grow up we begin to realize thatsome of these values are man-made and we start to wonder if we need to keepthem. Some of these values are discardedwhile others are kept.
Despiteall of these changes, the person still feels that certain behavior isinherently right or wrong. However, whatwould happen if the person would be continually bombarded with the teachingthat there are no absolute truths, no universal standard of right orwrong? Well, basically, he will begin tofeel that no behavior is inherently good or bad, nothing is really wrong. He would feel that he can basically dowhatever he wants. He would be free topursue whatever would profit him the most.
Now,couple this mindset with a person who is extremely angry. Normally, when a person is angry, his actionsare governed by a value system that prohibits certain anti-social actions. However, when a person believes that thereare no absolute values of right or wrong, then there is nothing to hold himback. An extremely angry person who hasno anti-social restrictions is capable of doing almost anything. They are hurting deep inside and they wantothers to hurt. Hurting a large numberof people becomes one of their consuming desires.
If theshift in society is the real reason why we have an increase in gun violence,especially the high-profile school shootings, then gun control or even gunelimination will not make any significant difference in the violence we areexperiencing. Violent people will simplyfind a new weapon of choice. If a personwants to harm other people, he will find a way to do it.
If clubswere the only weapons available, this angry person would use a club to try to beatto death as many people as possible. Ifthere are no other people nearby who also have clubs, he will probably be ableto hurt or kill a large number of people. As a general rule, any weapon can be used as a weapon of mass murder ifthere are no other weapons nearby to stop him.
Manypeople will disagree with me. They willargue that eliminating guns will eliminate the ability to quickly attack alarge number of people. While it is truethat guns are quick and convenient, other weapons can also be used to attacklarge groups of people in a short period of time. The stabbing of 14 people at the Lone Star Texas Community College twoweeks ago is proof of this. If guns wereeliminated, knifes or machetes could easily take their place. Machetes have been used in numerous attacksat school. Following is a quick list ofattacks at schools where machetes were used.
· 1977,a man kills five people in El Socorro
· 1996,a man slashed seven people in a primary school in England
· 2001,a man brutally slashed nine people in Pennsylvania
· 2010,a man in Nanping China hacked 13 children, killing 8
· 2011,a student was killed in South Africa
· 2012,a man in Guangxi China hacked 16 people in a private day care, killing 3
· 2012,a man in Guatemala City killed two children
Theonly reason why we have more shootings at school verses stabbings is becauseguns are currently the weapon of choice. If guns were eliminate the violent people would simply move to a newweapon of choice.
I wantto start out by saying that I am not a gun enthusiast or a gun collector and I haveno personal stake in this argument. Ijust want to bring up two points that seems to be lost in all of thefrustration and anger resulting from this debate. There are two questions we need to consider:
1. Wouldnew gun laws actually resolve the current problems?
2. Isthis recent rise in gun violence directly related to the abundance of guns?
1) GunLaws: There are two typesof gun control laws that could be enacted:
· Addextra criminal charges and more prison time when a gun is used in a crime.
· Eliminatepurchasing loopholes and make it much harder to purchase a gun.
Wealready have extremely strict penalties regarding using guns in criminalencounters. These laws help deter gunuse in certain types of crimes and I’m not opposed to adding stiffer sentencesto these crimes. However, a person intenton murder (or mass murders) is not going to be concerned about facing additionalyears in prison because he used a gun. Healready is facing the death penalty or life in prison.
Thisonly leaves the option of enacting laws designed to keep guns from these peoplein the first place. Apart from anyConstitutional arguments, is it even realistic to think that this wouldwork? Restricting gun access might workif the U.S. didn’t have many guns in the first place and we could restrict gunsfrom coming across our borders.
Evenif the U.S. didn’t have many guns, we would never be able to keep new guns fromcrossing our very porous borders. Remember,we are almost powerless in stopping drugs and illegal immigrants from crossingour borders. Even with all of oursecurity concerns after 9/11, we still have not been able to seal up theseborders.
As of2007, there were over 270 million civilian guns in the U.S (Small Arms Survey 2007 p. 67). We are not even talking about military or lawenforcement guns. Do we really thinkthat all of these civilian guns are owned by upstanding law-abidingcitizens? No, it is estimated that around75 to 100 million of these guns are owned by the criminal underworld or bypeople who could not pass the current background checks. In addition, millions of guns are currently availableon the black market. For all practicalpurposes, buying an illegal gun is just as easy as buying illegal drugs.
Yes,it is true that many of the recent high-profile shootings were done with gunsthat were purchased legally. However, isthat really the issue? Let’s say, forthe sake of argument, that we are able to enact laws that would completelyclose off all loopholes for the sales of legal guns. Only solid law-abiding citizens can nowpurchase guns. Let’s also say that wedon’t have over 230 thousand guns stolen from homes every year (Bureau of Justice Statistics, November8, 2012).
Do youreally think that a person who is bent on murder would have a moral dilemmaabout buying an illegal gun from the black market instead of through legalchannels? Unless you can effectivelyeliminate the sales of guns in the criminal under-world, new gun control lawswill be virtually ineffective. Yes, theselaws would make us feel good, but they would be unproductive.
2) Thereason for the recent gun violence:
Is ourrecent increase in gun violence a result of a recent surplus of guns? No, the United States has always had anabundance of guns, but we have not always had this level of violence or gunviolence. Violence, especially gunviolence has increased significantly over the past several decades. If the abundance of guns is not the source ofthis violence, what is the source?
Forwhatever reason, there has been a marked shift in the stability of oursociety. A large number of people are nowdeveloping a tendency toward violent outbursts. Their ability to control these outbursts also seems to be diminishing. In addition, a large number of people havetaken on the mindset that they don’t need to follow “normal socialbehavior.” What is causing this shift? I’m sure there are many factors involved inthis problem, but I would like to offer a partial explanation.
We areall governed by various sets of values. Some of these values are hard wired within us, such as the feeling thatit is wrong to lie, steal, rape, and murder. Other values have been instilled in us by ourparents, schools, and community, such as work ethics, cultural expectations,etc. As we grow up we begin to realize thatsome of these values are man-made and we start to wonder if we need to keepthem. Some of these values are discardedwhile others are kept.
Despiteall of these changes, the person still feels that certain behavior isinherently right or wrong. However, whatwould happen if the person would be continually bombarded with the teachingthat there are no absolute truths, no universal standard of right orwrong? Well, basically, he will begin tofeel that no behavior is inherently good or bad, nothing is really wrong. He would feel that he can basically dowhatever he wants. He would be free topursue whatever would profit him the most.
Now,couple this mindset with a person who is extremely angry. Normally, when a person is angry, his actionsare governed by a value system that prohibits certain anti-social actions. However, when a person believes that thereare no absolute values of right or wrong, then there is nothing to hold himback. An extremely angry person who hasno anti-social restrictions is capable of doing almost anything. They are hurting deep inside and they wantothers to hurt. Hurting a large numberof people becomes one of their consuming desires.
If theshift in society is the real reason why we have an increase in gun violence,especially the high-profile school shootings, then gun control or even gunelimination will not make any significant difference in the violence we areexperiencing. Violent people will simplyfind a new weapon of choice. If a personwants to harm other people, he will find a way to do it.
If clubswere the only weapons available, this angry person would use a club to try to beatto death as many people as possible. Ifthere are no other people nearby who also have clubs, he will probably be ableto hurt or kill a large number of people. As a general rule, any weapon can be used as a weapon of mass murder ifthere are no other weapons nearby to stop him.
Manypeople will disagree with me. They willargue that eliminating guns will eliminate the ability to quickly attack alarge number of people. While it is truethat guns are quick and convenient, other weapons can also be used to attacklarge groups of people in a short period of time. The stabbing of 14 people at the Lone Star Texas Community College twoweeks ago is proof of this. If guns wereeliminated, knifes or machetes could easily take their place. Machetes have been used in numerous attacksat school. Following is a quick list ofattacks at schools where machetes were used.
· 1977,a man kills five people in El Socorro
· 1996,a man slashed seven people in a primary school in England
· 2001,a man brutally slashed nine people in Pennsylvania
· 2010,a man in Nanping China hacked 13 children, killing 8
· 2011,a student was killed in South Africa
· 2012,a man in Guangxi China hacked 16 people in a private day care, killing 3
· 2012,a man in Guatemala City killed two children
Theonly reason why we have more shootings at school verses stabbings is becauseguns are currently the weapon of choice. If guns were eliminate the violent people would simply move to a newweapon of choice.