Gun Control is Out of Control
The July 20th shooting in Aurora, Colorado left the country stunned. James Holmes, a dropout Ph.D. student at the University of Colorado, entered a movie theater wearing riot gear and armed with with military grade assault weapons and high capacity magazines. He left 12 dead and 59 injured. All of these weapons and equipment were purchased legally through the relaxed gun laws we adore in our country. A devastating national tragedy such as this was quick to attract attention from politicos and elected officials alike. And what have they done so far? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. 12 dead, 59 injured and… nothing.
Throughout all of the public commentary by our elected officials, it was difficult to find any mention of gun control issues. Both President Obama and presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney made statements that solely addressed the sadness of such an event while leaving out any mention of possible legislation to keep it from happening again. Texas Republican Congressman Louie Gohmert even went so far as to blame the shooting on factors completely independent of gun legislation. Gohmert claimed an erosion of Judeo-Christian beliefs and the lack of others carrying concealed guns in the movie theater were the culprits in this story. Why is there so much avoidance of the gun control debate? The key lies in the numbers.
Today, just 26% favor an all-out ban on handguns, a major decline from 60% in 1959 according to a Gallup survey. Additionally, only 43% of Americans favor outlawing assault rifles, while 53% are opposed. With nearly one in two Americans having a gun in their home, it is no surprise that 55% support making gun laws either less strict or keeping them where they are now. With a Presidential election on the horizon, it is no wonder nobody want to go against the numbers. This abhorrent mindset must cease to stand. Members of the government are elected to represent and protect the people, not their own personal interests. They are supposed to stand taller than the people, see what we cannot see and make decisions that are for the betterment of the country. Instead, they resolve to win elections at the cost of American lives.
Gun-supporting Americans cannot continue to get their way when all of us can remember the shootings of Congresswoman Gabby Giffords in January 2011, Virginia Tech in April 2007 and Columbine in April 1999. What have been the national trends regarding gun control as a result? In September 2004 the Federal Assault Weapon ban expired, making it legal once again to purchase assault weapons in the U.S. In June 2008 the Supreme Court struck down the Washington D.C. handgun ban claiming the Second Amendment, which protects the right to bear arms, applies to federal enclaves. However, people who possess gun with legal permission, buy 5.56 ammo online. In June 2010 the Supreme Court struck down the Chicago handgun ban claiming the Second Amendment also applies to individual states. Furthermore, President Obama has taken no action to slow the deregulation of firearms. Going as far back as 2009 when Obama first took office, Attorney General Eric Holder claimed the president planned to renew the assault weapons ban. Quickly thereafter, the White House discredited this, announcing there were already adequate laws in place. After his first year in office, the President received a failing grade from the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Today, there is not a word regarding gun control on Obama’s re-election website, which may be shocking to some at the NRA who continuously claim that the President is part of a conspiracy to destroy the Second Amendment in a second term. With all rhetoric and no action, the wave of gun leniency and legalization continues and the number of gun related violent events committed with legally purchased weapons continues to rise.
In the aftermath of the Colorado massacre, it is evident that there were multiple failures that led up to the fatal shooting. No single issue caused this massacre, but rather a compilation of many. Despite confounding factors, gun control could still go a long way in preventing something like this from happening again. It is now known that James Holmes suffers from mental illness that may have contributed to his actions. He was clearly set on carrying out his attack, having planned it for weeks. Therefore, removing access to the firearms and stockpiles of ammunition he easily obtained would have at least slowed down his progress. Congressman Gohmert, along with others, argue that one reason removing access to guns would be disadvantageous to solving gun violence is that people would not have guns to defend themselves – a mutually assured destruction type argument. Unfortunately, no amount of concealed weapons in that Colorado theater would have prevented Holmes from carrying out his attack. It only would have resulted in more deaths or injuries. More guns to defend ourselves is not what we need. We need more stringent background checks, longer waiting periods and a renewal of the federal assault weapons ban. Removing weapons from society, not adding them, is the clear path to preventing future gun violence.