Does this look familiar? It should, because this is where America currently seems to be at when it comes to the issue of gun control and how it will or won’t work in America. The only question that I’m going to pose at the moment is: where you do fit in to this picture? Some of us might think that guns aren’t necessary and are far too destructive in the hands of anyone, while others think that guns are absolutely necessary and they’re our right (which they are technically) while others are just heaving a collective sigh and wishing this debate could find a suitable compromise. And if you’ll notice, we’re (yes, I am one of those individuals in the middle) constantly overlooked as we wait for those fueling this argument to come to some agreement that can work for both of them. Can gun control work? Have we even really tried it yet? Some people would say of course we have, but given the state of things lately that statement doesn’t seem to be entirely true.
So here we go onto a volatile topic that a lot of us can at least agree is something that deserves a lot more discussion.
Guns are not the evil that some people are so willing to fight against.
Guns do have a practical use. They don’t fire unless they’re being handled, and most of all, taking them away doesn’t insure that people will be safe. The argument of course is to take guns away from the wrong people, but there seems to be a big misconception about who the ‘wrong’ people and who the ‘right’ ones are. So a person owns an extensive collection of handguns and rifles and other firearms. That doesn’t make them the wrong kind of person any more than it makes a person that collects bottles of alcohol an alcoholic. Yes the propensity for misuse is there, but it’s not a guarantee that it will happen. On the other hand, sometimes those that are deemed as the ‘right’ people tend to be the ones that should never handle anything more dangerous than a cap gun. Judging people by the number and type of guns that they have is not an accurate way to go about settling this issue, so let’s move on.
People are adamant that allowing everyone to arm themselves is a good idea.
The general consensus with some folks is that being able to carry a gun will enable people to stop a crime, however big or small, by whipping out their gun and pointing it at the offender. You might think that this is an effective way to stop crime, and depending on the situation, the location, and the person pulling the gun it might be. But then again, what if someone’s having a bad day or holding a grudge against another person? What if that individual doesn’t have the kind of impulse control needed to carry a gun? Sure there might be a screening process and a psych eval that a person can go through to ascertain whether they’re able to carry a firearm or not, but does anyone think that’s going to stop a motivated individual from obtaining a permit to conceal carry? It might seem kind of paranoid to think that anyone might just go shooting up a place because they’re having anger issues, but after all that’s happened is that really such a fantastical idea any longer? There’s no doubt that in some areas being able to carry concealed has helped, but the point is that everyone having a gun and being able to conceal it or carry it in plain sight is more a step back towards the Old West than it is a leap into a secure future.
Keep in mind, if it’s paranoia that drives the thought of someone pulling a legally-licensed weapon and firing off for the hell of it, then it’s also a hint of paranoia to think that someone might come for your guns at the first sign of trouble.
Things have changed, and they’ll keep changing no doubt.
Gun control is needed, but the rights of citizens to bear arms still needs to be taken into account. The type of guns that are available to people is not the problem, it’s that the people buying and using them are not always being screened so as to insure that they won’t flip and go off the rails, thereby creating another massacre that will continue to fuel the arguments of those that would seek to disarm those that will fight so vehemently to keep their firearms. It’s a continual and very circular argument that seems to have no way of breaking out of the cycle other than for one side to cede defeat and give way. That’s not likely to happen if you’ve been paying attention.
There’s a way for gun control to work, and to appease everyone at the same time, but so far no one seems ready to listen or to even contemplate what it might be.