By Kyle Auger
Sports Editor
Sixty-one. In the past thirty years, there have been sixty-one mass murders with guns in the United States. Of the twenty-five worst mass shootings of the last fifty years, fifteen of them were on American soil; the second place nation had two. If those numbers do not incur motivation to change legislation, I’m not sure what will. People do have rights, and they should be able to defend themselves, but limits to what kind of guns people can own and how they can obtain them is the best solution in my opinion.
This debate has been heating up locally, where there has been town meetings to discuss whether or not to allow assault weapons in Westford. The hearing to decide whether or not to enact the rule had to be pushed back due to more spectators attending than the venue could hold.
There is no need for a single man to own a military-style assault rifle. It is not necessary in a normal day-to-day life. I understand that hunting is a major activity for people all over the country, and that is an activity that should still be enjoyed. Sportsmen can tell you, assault rifles are not necessary to hunt, and single shot rifles suffice in killing deer and other game animals.
Obviously, pistols and single shot rifles can kill humans, so what else do people need for self defense? In a defensive situation, it seems highly unlikely that someone would need to fire thirty rounds for self preservation.
In the words of former NRA President Charlton Heston, guns are objective, and it is the operator that is the issue. However, if people are so dangerous, why arm them?
“Let me make a short, opening, blanket comment. There are no good guns. There are no bad guns. Any gun in the hands of a bad man is a bad thing. Any gun in the hands of a decent person is no threat to anybody — except bad people,” said Heston.
People need to realize the federal government and its supporters are not trying to take people’s guns, it is simply an argument of self control and practicality. Guns are something instilled in our nation’s roots, and it is true that it has to be respected, but people should not have dangerous weapons just because they can.
In 2009, more than two thirds of all murders were committed with a firearm, and two years later, there was 30,470 firearm related deaths in the United States. It’s hard to combat these numbers.People say that bad people will still get their hands on weapons, but that has shown through history that that isn’t true.
Another reasonable regulation is to augment the process to obtain a gun as well as where it must be stored. This idea can be compared with how long it takes to legally own and operate a motor vehicle. It takes hours of training and classes to get a license. The process is one that is effective keeping streets safe.
This idea also connects to the words of Heston. The process of making sure only responsible gun owners can get guns should be a universally agreeable idea.
For example, in South Dakota, where there is a 48 hour waiting period to obtain a gun, only 48% of murders were caused by guns. That figure is extremely lower than the national average.
Similarly, I believe gun owners need to go through deeper background checks and more educational courses. If you plan to not misbehave with a weapon, then why not go through the process so that everyone is safe.
Another idea was that people who buy guns, should have to store their weapon in a locked, secure safe to protect the gun from anyone but the registered owner from using the gun, per what happened in Sandy Hook when the perpetrator stole his mother’s gun.
Firearms are not only a threat from criminals to innocent citizens. Thousands of people misuse guns more times than proper use in situations of self defense. In a study by Arthur Kellermann it concluded that accidental deaths are much more common within homes where guns are readily available. He concluded that the ratio of of accidental deaths to justifiable deaths of intruders was 6.4 to one.
Finally, anti-gun control advocates complain that moderate reform would hurt the economy. But these lobbyists have to understand this ultimatum: what is more important, CEOs padding their net worths, or the lives of thousands of people every year who get cut short because of their product?
Times have changed. Guns have evolved into much more efficient killing machines and need to be secure. It’s a time in history when lawmakers need to use the overbearing evidence and hundreds of innocent deaths as motivation to keep larger restrictions on gun ownership for the protection of all citizens.
