Everyone has their own opinion on whether guns should be more readily available to ensure the safety of people in instances such as school shootings. Or, for others, if they should be put under heavey lock and key to keep the guns out of the hands of the people who might do harm with them. These arguments arose here at K after a group of students were held at gunpoint by a man on campus who stole their phones and was later caught.
If we apply the “we need more guns” thought process to this, it will not end well. It could have been a really terrible confrontation and no one wants that.
If we apply the “guns kill people, people don’t kill people” logic, it probably wouldn’t have changed a thing. Guns find their way into the hands of the bad guys no matter how difficult you make it to find. In either case, this scary event would not have been any better.
From a broader view, let’s take something larger, such as the Aurora, Coloardo shooting. This tragic incident ended many innocent lives and left the country in a split over what should be done when it comes to gun control.
Many people claimed that this could have been avoided if any only someone in that theater had had a gun. They could have pulled it out and taken the gunman down before he caused as much damage and death as he did.
The other half of America believed that if there were stricter gun regulations, the guns that the shooter got hold of may not have been available or at least made it much more difficult to purchase.
Each solution has disadvantages. Having another person with a gun in that theater would not have solved anything. There is little chance that he or she would have been able to ready the weapon, fire without hitting any innocent people, and take the gunman down. Having a full-out firefight in the middle of a small-town theater does not sound like something anyone would want to have happen.
The other side has equally little ground on this matter. Having stricter gun regulations would have no guarantee that it would have deterred him in any way.
If I had to choose a side, I would go with the “more guns” side of things.
Now before everyone jumps on the “you heartless creature, think of the kids” bandwagon, let me explain.
It is almost impossible to correctly regulate guns to be 100 percent effective against crazed gunmen. The guns will always fall into the bad guys’ hands, regardless of how regulated they are. There are markets and places where people can freely buy firearms. This means that regulating them could possibly keep them away from people who can use them for good: such as ex-cops, former military, or gun enthusiasts.
If there is a gunman shooting people down in the middle of a crowded street, I would much rather have less regulated guns control laws so that the possibility that a ‘good guy’ having a gun and neutralizing them is significantly more likely.
People who want to do harm will still do harm. Putting regulations on them may make it harder to get, but it won’t stop the shots from being fired.