Guns Should Be—Need To Be—Banned
Let’s recap, shall we?
3/6/2008—
UNC Student Body President Shot and Killed
3/6/2008—
High School Student Shoots and Kills Himself During an Assembly
3/5/2008—
Auburn Freshman Shot and Killed
2/14/2008—Seven NIU Students Shot and Killed
2/8/2008—
Three Louisiana Tech Students Shot and Killed
11/19/2007—
U of C Graduate Student Shot and Killed
4/16/2007—
33 Virginia Tech Students and Faculty Shot and Killed
1/3/2007—
High School Student Shoots and Kills Fellow Student
10/2/2006—
Five Amish Elementary School Students Shot and Killed in PA
9/29/2006—
High School Student Shoots and Kills Principal
9/27/2006—
High School Student Shoots and Kills Fellow Student
9/13/2006—
Dawson College Student Shot and Killed
11/8/2005—
High School Student Shoots and Kills Assistant Principal
3/21/2005—
High School Student Shoots and Kills Seven Fellow Students, Grandfather, Grandfather’s Girlfriend
9/24/2003—
High School Student Shoots and Kills Two Fellow Students
5/9/2003—
Case Graduate Student Shot and Killed
1/16/2002—
Appalachian Law Student Shoots and Kills Fellow Student, Two Faculty
3/22/2001—
High School Student Shoots and Kills Two Fellow Students
5/27/2000—
Junior High Student Shoots and Kills Teacher
4/20/1999—
Two High School Students Shoot and Kill 13 Fellow Students
Okay, this is getting ridiculous. And scary. Let’s remember that these are only the shooting incidents that happened in the US within the past several years—since Columbine—involving students that I can remember and/or come across after searching. There are likely others in this category that I’ve missed. (Isn’t it awful that we should need such a categorization of shootings? And categories within it?) In other words, an exceedingly small subset of a huge, massive, urgent problem.
By my count, there are at least 90 students in the above list that have been killed in the past nine years, and to call that figure exceedingly small almost makes me first want to throw up and second drop everything I’m doing and run for Congress. It’s worth mentioning, too, that this doesn’t include all of the others—the ones that were shot but not killed, the ones that ended up in comas, the ones that weren’t students. It doesn’t include gang shootings, shootings in churches, shootings by and of spited lovers, shootings in workplaces, shootings of police officers, or any other shooting, none of which are regulated to any discernible degree. It also doesn’t include similar events in Canada, Mexico, and around the world that happen essentially on a weekly basis. ( See?)
The Second Amendment of the US Constitution allows us this: “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.” This little “right” of ours seems to be getting people killed left and right, and this is okay? This is a few bad bugs here and there? This is atypical? This is just a bunch of “hormonal high school kids?”I am getting to the point where I vehemently disagree with the Second Amendment. I flat out think it should be repealed. Immediately. I’m not talking about people with mental issues. I’m not talking about terrorism suspects. I’m not talking about illegal gun sales. (I’m definitely not talking about bear arms, which are A-okay in my book.) I’m talking about all gun sales to everyone.
“What about hunters?” Yes, what about the hunters?? Hunt with knives. Hunt with bow and arrow. Hunt with traps. It’s more fair that way anyway. Plus, most trap owners aren’t going to go into a school on a random Wednesday and trap people to death.
“What about the police?” If laypeople didn’t have guns, why would the police need them?
“What about personal protection?” See above re: knives. Baseball bats, crow bars, mace, and fists (fists?! human fists?!) apply here, too. There is absolutely no reason to own a gun for personal protection, especially if attempted robbers don’t have guns either.
“What about the black market?” If lawmakers set aside some money in the budget for a reward for turning in guns, I’m pretty sure many of the guns in households would come in in exchange for compensation (cash, tax breaks, etc.), and this would reduce the prevalence of guns in the general population somewhat.
“What about the army? We are at war, you know.” No comment.
Fundamentally, people need to stop shooting each other. Failing this, which we clearly are, someone needs to do something about guns themselves. This country—this world—needs to do a lot more talking and a lot less shooting and bombing.
Unbelievably, a State Senator from Arizona thinks this problem would be solved if more students and professors had guns, including those in kindergarten and elementary school. And her bill passed the Senate! Right, I see, so any potential gunman could be shot by any combination of a number of other gunman before the first gunman shoots too many people. That’s precisely what we need more of in schools: not just guns or simple shootings, but frank gun fights, “good” gunmen shooting other “good” gunmen, and potential hostage situations with completely untrained mediators! Seriously lady, are you kidding me?
I say, screw guns. If everybody is allowed to walk around with guns, it’s probably not going to be long until we see people going around with missile launchers and bombs, you know, just in case they get mugged or a gunman enters their classroom.
Find out how to take the guns away from the bad guys and THEN we’ll talk about the gun controll issue. Till then, all you will do is disarm the good guys and allow the bad guys to roam the country and own it. The police can’t be there to help us. For instance, why are school and such shot up but police stations and gun shows, etc. are not? Maybe because the bad guys are cowards and are afraid to face good cicitzens with the ability to defend themselves. Figure that one out first. And make sure you post your dwelling w/ a big sign that says “I have no guns”! Till you and all the other gun controll advocates do that, you are all hypocrits hiding behind the rest of us.
Tom
[...] Another one bites the dust shot and killed at school. These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]
Well said, Benjamin. PS I’m sure the yahoo above is my father. And/or lives in Tennessee.
There is good reason to own guns. Most violent criminals are young men. Many victims are female and/or elderly. Sometimes criminals attack in groups. We have a lot of home invasions down here in northwest Florida. I wish more homeowners were armed and resisted these criminals.
I appreciate the article’s sincerity over the deaths from the student massacres. Those are tragedies. But every day in this country predatory people attack those weaker than themselves. Guns are a good equalizer.
You people are completely missing the point. If no one had guns, what better equalizer would there be? If everyone had guns, in order to “level the playing field,” don’t you think the “bad guys” would try to upgrade from mere guns to regain the upper hand? I wasn’t kidding about the bombs and missile launchers.
Tom, for you to call me a hypocrite is way off-base. I have never owned a gun, I will never own a gun, and I hope I never have to confront anyone using a gun against me. But, if I do, I won’t regret not having been equipped with a gun, just like I won’t regret not having been equipped with a knife if someone pulls a knife on me, or not having undergone formal boxing training if someone blindsides me on the street. It’s unfortunate that the “bad guys” have guns and clearly use them—a lot—but I still feel strongly that the world would be a better place without so many weapons. Without them, we wouldn’t have to be so paranoid and so defensive about what others may or may not do to us and who between us is better armed.
Also, I HAVE NO GUNS. (I do have locked doors though.) I live in Chicago, Illinois. Come and get me.
It’s difficult for me to believe that someone with so much intelligence could be so ignorant.
I don’t think Ben is the ignorant one here. It appears that there are so many strong headed opinions that no one is able to think of other options. It seems as if people think guns are the only way to defend themselves. And why should you have to feel that way…oh, because there are tons of people with guns that shouldn’t have them.
If it was easy for everyone to own a gun people would basically be in shooting matches all the time. This is why there are gun control laws.
I think it will be a very long time until this argument is solved because there are so many situations to take into account. Eliminating guns all together is just another option to consider.
My favorite line of reasoning is the one about young men having guns, and women and the elderly being victims of gun violence … y’know, because if we give all the feeble, helpless people guns, they will TOTALLY know how to use them in case of an attack, and the assailant wouldn’t, y’know, grab the gun from their hands immediately.
As for the comment about someone with so much intelligence being so ignorant … how’s about the fact that we are the only civilized nation that has this kind of problem with excessive violence, random and premeditated? And, oh, funnily enough, we are ALSO the only country that lets people run around with guns.
The only people that should be allowed to have guns are people that can handle them and can handle themselves in case of an assault. That narrows my list way way down to, like, trained public authority figures. Who, oddly enough, don’t technically NEED the guns if they are trained properly anyway, because they can defend themselves.
And if we stopped handing guns out like they were candy — even used tax-funded, cash incentive programs to get bad guys to turn in their guns — we would very quickly not need to worry about the bad guys having guns.
But we wouldn’t want a tax increase, or to see our government dollars going to the desperately impoverished/criminal/lower class types, now would we?
If guns are banned entirely, innocent, law abiding citizens will not have weapons. The catch is, it won’t stop criminals and a number of others from obtaining guns, which in turn endangers those who no longer have guns they relied on for defense. You say we should defend ourselves with other means, then what is the difference? Guns or knives? Does either solve the problem? In many places around the world, Knives have entered school classrooms killing a large number of people. For example, In Japan 8 1st and 2nd grade students were stabbed and killed by a man armed with a knife. Good luck banning those. I guess we can’t have kitchen knives anymore. Not to mention scissors, grass clippers, saws, axes and whatever else.
We are never going to have peace that you claim to be the best solution. It isn’t going to happen. Wake up to reality. You can’t stop everything and people are always going to be killing each other. We are human and we strive for reform in every aspect we complain about. And yes things get better but nothing is going to be perfect.
Disarming people will only make criminals feel it would be easier to commit a crime knowing that most likely the house they are about to rob isn’t armed with a firearm anymore. Have fun with that idea. I believe in regulation of firearms and background checks that are modified so guns will not get into the possession of someone who seeks harm to others but the truth is, many who do such crimes obtained guns from the outside sources such as, gangs, underground dealers and such. In the context of the Columbine shootings and Virginia tech and others, guns were bought for them by friends or aquantances. like everything has a flaw, so do background checks. You can’t stop everyone and you can’t keep guns away from criminals. Mine as well arm the citizens who obey the law and only want one to protect themselves and their families. In many cases where people have guns, crime decreased in substantial rates. This is a horrible unpredictable world we live in. Banning guns would not make any sense because the point is to disarm potential criminals. In reality, your disarming people who just want to protect themselves. A gun is just another weapon next to bats, knives, crowbars and what not. It’s a tool to kill in a time of conflict and for the defense of anything in any form. It’s a tool to either get your way or to stop someone from continuing on.
You can either ban guns entirely which will not reduce crime rate and death. Or you can allow law abiding citizens to have guns which has proven to substantially reduce crime in areas where citizens are armed. And yes, due to the fact that people are allowed to have guns has caused crime and people have died. But without such priviledge I honestly believe a larger number of people would be endangered. There is a sacrifice for everything. Since people are able to have guns, many people have prevented possible death because they owned firearms.
Simple understanding: with guns legal; some people die. With guns illegal;a possibility more can be killed.
“I say, screw guns. If everybody is allowed to walk around with guns, it’s probably not going to be long until we see people going around with missile launchers and bombs, you know, just in case they get mugged or a gunman enters their classroom.”
You can’t properly argue when You use fallacies as stated above. “…it’s probably not going to be long until we see people going around with missile launchers and bombs…” This is nicknamed the Slippery slope fallacy. The assumption that once something happens it will lead to another.
Good point. We clearly agree on this point. You are very astute.
…
QED, Mr. Philosopher.
Lemme tell you something. I’d much rather have someone come at me with a bat and a knife and a crowbar and scissors and grass clippers(?) and a saw and an axe than with a gun. I can run away from those. Those are less likely to result in lethal injuries and less likely to cause mass casualties than a single, solitary gun even from long range.
Do you really think I’ve never been shot at or robbed at gunpoint simply because potential criminals fear I have a gun in my house or I’m concealing a weapon of my own?
[...] agrees with me. They’re smart, rational people and take such things to be increasingly, alarmingly, [...]
I would like to point out that 42,636 people were killed in auto accidents in 2005. Where is the call to ban cars? The comparison may seem ludicrous but I think it points out a fundamental flaw in the way people look at death. In that same year about 14,000 where killed by people with guns. (I want to make the distinction that someone was holding the gun and not that the gun suddenly came to life and killed someone on their own)
Because someone purposely shot someone else makes guns evil. Therefore we must ban guns. I don’t hear people calling for the ban of baseball bats when victims are bludgeoned to death. Or a call for the ban on knives when people are stabbed to death.
I think the entire argument for gun control is only used as a catalyst for the jump start of new political careers and a talking point for those who want to remain in office.
You caught me, Robert. I’m jump-starting my political career.
Look, as I have alluded to before, guns are unique from bats, knives, etc. You can run from the latter. Guns have the ability to kill people from long distance. They can be easily concealed.
Perhaps worst of all, they are often associated with gang activity, and this is a huge reason why the gun culture needs to change in this country. Killing people with cars is not high on most gangs’ priority lists. Neither is beating people with bats, or stabbing people with knives. You can’t drive-by beat or stab people very easily, and if you do, it’s very unlikely that you’d instead hit an innocent bystander who’s playing in a playground or eating dinner in their dining room.
Sure, if there were no guns, I wouldn’t be surprised if bats and knives became the next big thing with gangs. Then we’d have to have a talk about what to do about it. If there were no guns, it’d be unlikely that kids would go into their parents’ closets and beat themselves to death over the head with their parents’ bats or stab themselves with knives. To be sure—I haven’t looked into the statistics here—very few kids do this to themselves now in their garages and kitchens, but I could be wrong. It is tempting for them, I know.
Bats and knives have other societal uses too, namely to play baseball with and to cut things with. With cars, for example, you can drive around and go places. Aside from killing things, what are some of the other uses for guns?
If you want to talk about numbers: Lung cancer kills way more people than your puny MVA stats every year. What do we do about it? We take steps to reduce second-hand smoke for those who don’t actively smoke cigarettes in public places. You can’t run away from that either. We encourage people to quit. We impose financial penalties on those who do not. We (think about) regulating them through the FDA as a matter of safety. As far as other, less safe drugs go, well, they are banned, no?
Smoking is another issue all together. The government over stepped it’s power when it decided that they could tell people and businesses when and where they could not smoke. But it brings up a good point - why haven’t cigarette’s been banned?
On that argument about the government regulating safety, we should call for the immediate ban of fast food, ice-cream, tobacco, alcohol, and salt. All these things lead to bad health, obesity, and diabetes - some of the top killers in the US.
But we do not ban these things because we assume people of a certain amount of responsibility. The vast majority of gun owners in the US are not going out shooting people. It is a small element of a total people that are going out shooting people.
“Perhaps worst of all, they are often associated with gang activity, and this is a huge reason why the gun culture needs to change in this country”
How about we change the overall culture. Morals and values are losing to decadence and bad behavior. Single parent homes, homes where parents are gone 16 hours a day, and kids who are left to be raised by television or baby-sitters who could not care less about giving a child a firm foundation on right and wrong. These are the things that need to change. The decay of society was not caused by guns.
“Sure, if there were no guns, I wouldn’t be surprised if bats and knives became the next big thing with gangs. Then we’d have to have a talk about what to do about it.”
It is statements like that that scare me the most. Where does it end? When do we stop banning and start making people responsible?
I understand your sentiment, but we are never going to agree. I do however respect your view. You have intelligent arguments and I appreciate the rationalness of your statements.
Stay safe and hold onto your beliefs. One day society will make a change that will hopefully work for both of us.
Agreed, Robert. You know what? All I want is for people to stop shooting other people, but unfortunately I don’t think that’s ever going to happen. Here’s hoping.
Ben, for what its worth I agree with you, however in reading the BBC News about my home country on a regular basis I have noticed an ever increasing trend toward gun crimes there too. Gun laws were tightened after a man walked into a school in Dunblane a few years ago, however just last year a 16 year old gunned down a boy younger than him in Liverpool. That’s one example, but there are more. The UK Police are arming more and more of their officers in a bid to get control and defend themselves and innocent people - all of this remember in a country where private gun ownership is virtually impossible.
So I wonder whether guns are the issue, or maybe its just the people who will take posession and use them regardless of the laws?
Its a terrifyingly interesting topic of discussion, and I thank you for the distraction while I sit on the tarmac at Ohare …