Gun control is one of the biggest issues contended in America today. It is something that needs to be questioned and most Americans will not be satisfied until we have a clear cut definition of what it means to be allowed to bear arms. This idea is the second on our famous list of amendments and it guarantees American citizens the right to keep and carry weapons, namely firearms. Now, for the majority of our country’s history, this right went largely unquestioned. For many years it was perfectly normal for the average American family to own guns. Hunting was a much more popular activity in early America and in order to hunt, you need a gun. Teddy Roosevelt himself was an avid sportsman and a huge advocate of hunting and conservation. He was the one who founded America’s national park system in the hopes that we could preserve these wild areas for Americans to enjoy for years to come.
Now, however, the right to own and carry guns has come under very harsh criticism, and it is not without a reasonable bases. Over the past two decades we have seen viscous shootings that have taken the lives of hundreds of innocent people, many of whom were young school students. The most notable shooting in recent years happened on December 14, 2012 at Sandy Hook Elementary in Connecticut. A twenty year old man named Adam Lanza took an assault rifle and entered the school, fatally shooting more than twenty students, most of whom were in kindergarten, and six staff members. This is probably the most tragic day America has seen since 9/11.
This horrible event sparked the debate among Americans once again about what to do with this amendment that allows criminals to gain access to dangerous weapons. Typically, the liberal side of America wishes to get rid of guns entirely, and the conservatives wish to slacken the restrictions put on gun procurement.
There are obvious advantages and disadvantages to both. The advantages to owning guns usually take the backseat during these arguments and more focus is put on the danger of gun ownership. Some advantages to owning firearms would be increased protection against possible assailants, and recreation (many people enjoy going to the range and shooting guns). The benefit to banning guns are that it would be much more difficult for criminals to acquire them (provided the government does it right and keeps track on all weapons).
Is adding an amendment to the constitution to remove the second amendment the solution to our problems? Should the government just make it much more difficult for anyone with a criminal or mentally unstable past to purchase a gun? How does a country that for so long allowed its citizens to carry firearms simply take them away if that is the resolution agreed upon? And even if it does happen, will that prevent criminals from committing these mass murders, or will they simply find another means by which to do it?
Gun control is a tough one. There’s reasoning behind both “sides,” but reasoning is not enough to prove one solution over the other. Really both suggested solutions of the liberals or the conservatives I could see working. However, I do not believe either of them are a silver bullet to the problem either. Historically, illegal items have been hanging around quite a bit. Alcohol during prohibition. Drugs are smuggled/produced in our country everyday, they’re still around, I’m not sure what could be so different about guns. Economically speaking, a consumers “demand” for a certain good or service, even guns or drugs or whatever, is indistinguishable. The individual simply, demands a gun. Where there is s demand for guns, people do will do what it takes to satisfy that demand.