Updated date:

Why Gun Control Is the Answer

Author:

I've been a freelance writer focusing on movies, hiking, stamps, volleyball, and politics.

I recently read an article wherein the author compared gun control to restricting access to cars and alcohol. Here is my opinion about those comparisons.

I recently read an article wherein the author compared gun control to restricting access to cars and alcohol. Here is my opinion about those comparisons.

Comparing Guns to Cars

I just finished reading an article that was logically very well put together by a writer that I've had some major policy disagreements with. In this article, he compares guns to alcohol, illegal drugs, and vehicles.

One argument that he makes is that laws that restrict access to something really do not work. He claimed that during prohibition, there was actually more alcohol in supply and there was more crime related to restricting access to alcohol. Everyone knows that, although certain drugs are illegal, they exist in vast supplies in the United States. I'm not sure I have a rebuttal for that argument.

His second argument is that when someone goes out and drinks and drives and there is a death, we do not ban alcohol or cars. I'd even expand on this argument in that when someone killed eight people in November of 2017 using a van, no one banned vans.

The rebuttal here is that alcohol and cars have a primary use that is not to kill people. When you look at alcohol, most people see a tasty beverage that is used to relax. Most people see cars as transportation. When you consider a gun, its main purpose is to kill or injure living beings.

I know, I know, it's for protection you say. Guns exist to protect. I actually agree with that statement and truly believe that every citizen has the right to own a gun. What I don't believe is that every citizen has the right to own guns that are semi-automatic and have high-capacity magazines. Only law enforcement officials and military personnel need those kinds of devices.

Hunters don't need that style of weaponry. Home protection can be achieved more easily with handguns or shotguns. Those styles will achieve the same result in stopping or scaring off would-be intruders.

What about the threat of a tyrannical government? Believe me, with a fascist like Donald Trump in the White House, I've actually considered going out and buying my own AR-15. He's so obviously partisan and anti-everyone not white—heck, he's anti-anyone unwilling to kiss his rear-end— that it's only a matter of time until we're living the movie V for Vendetta. That being said, I'll wait to hear the conclusion of the Mueller investigation before determining how much danger the opposition is truly in.

But I digress. The rebuttal to taking away semi-automatic, high capacity weapons argument already exists. We already do the same for fully automatic. The average citizen does not get the ability to own their own M-60 machine gun. A fully loaded tank is not an option for my neighbor Bob, much to his disappointment. I bet he could really knock down a few 12-point bucks with the cannon, but alas, no hunting tanks for Bob.

Mass Shootings

There are just some weapons that cause too much destruction that the government doesn't want the average citizen to have them in their hands. I believe we've gotten there with semi-automatic, high capacity weaponry. I did the math; the body count in seven mass shootings since 2012 is 203 deaths and close to 1,000 other citizens have been shot.

It appears that the mass shooters keep setting the bar higher and higher too. Orlando had 49 dead and 50 injured. Then came Vegas with 60 dead and a whopping 851 others injured. Anything that can do that much damage in that short amount of time should not be available to someone without professional training.

To further that argument, I'd like to point out a bit of hypocrisy. Think of the case going on in North Korea. We're not trying to stop the man, we're trying to stop him from having nuclear weapons. If it's not the gun, it certainly can't be the nuke.

But Kim Jong Un is mentally unstable. That's the point. There are mentally unstable people all over the United States. The profiteering of the gun industry is preventing those mentally unstable people from being excluded from owning high-powered weapons. Hell, even the GOP Congress passed a law rolling back Obama-era restrictions on citizens with mental issues from purchasing weapons.

If you're going to let mentally unstable people own a gun, and the gun isn't the problem, why do you have a different standard for nuclear weapons? That's just a matter of degree, not philosophy.

Banning AR-15s

I certainly welcome an open dialogue here. But just sitting back and waiting for the next shooting and trying to get to the shooter before he sets a new murder record isn't working out so well.

Will there still be wackos that want to go nuts and will they be able to get a hold of guns? Probably. But removing the high-capacity option could save lives by lowering body counts and giving first responders more time to arrive on the scene. This will limit the potential severity of the damage, and hopefully, it will begin to dissuade some of these crazies.

Right now, doing nothing certainly isn't working.

This content reflects the personal opinions of the author. It is accurate and true to the best of the author’s knowledge and should not be substituted for impartial fact or advice in legal, political, or personal matters.

Comments

Ken Burgess from Florida on December 12, 2018:

So much to respond to here, where to begin?

On Trump: "heck, he's anti-anyone unwilling to kiss his rear-end"

You said it, and its close enough, he is not racist, not overly sexist, not particularly anything evil or tyrannical, other than the above quote.

You can throw in terms like egomaniac, arroganocious, but he is not the world's biggest idiot, nor is he the next Stalin.

It is the fact that he is an outsider, one not believing in socialist extremisms, or globalist agendas, that makes him as far from the likes of Pol Pot or Mao Zedong as one can get.

On to the main topic of guns.

The problems stem not just from the access of weapons, or the ease from which they are attained, but from the fact that there are more mentally unstable and irrational people within the population that are willing to use them...

The cause of this is probably incredibly complex, and constitutes everything from an increase in broken families, lack of discipline throughout society, increased exposure to graphic violence via ever growing sources of streaming 'entertainment', lack of restrictions on the mentally unstable and so on.

The other part of this is should AR-15s, AK-47s, etc. be banned in total from those not in the police or military. If there could be a definitive, absolute, un-alterable agreement that the government could not and would not ever ban single shot - bolt-action - lever-action - pump-action rifle types, only semi-automatic and those convertible to semi or full, I could support that.

But I know better, you cannot trust your government, and those who have agendas who constantly lobby it, to stop at that.

This is the same government that conspired to create a tax on people who could not afford to pay, or did not want to pay for health insurance.

This is the same government who has people in it that want to create a carbon footprint tax, so that you have to pay for the privilege of living and breathing.

I trust our government to limit their confiscation of guns to just semi-automatic rifles about as much as I trust them to tell me the truth about all things. Once we let them start down that slippery slope, it would only be a matter of time before you were allowed none.

Shiam Kannan from Basking Ridge, NJ on April 02, 2018:

As a conservative who dislikes trump, I still wouldn't go so far as to claim he is a "fascist." A narcissistic megalomaniac? Yes, absolutely. But I do not think he is a fascist. If he does something good (ie tax cuts for everyone not just the rich) ill support him. But i'll also criticize him if he does something wrong. But what irks me is the blanket statements on both sides "trump is literally hitler!" as well as "OMG daddy god emperor trump ill do whatever you say!" Both sentiments are equally wrong.

Alternative Prime from > California on February 23, 2018:

The first SIGNs of a long overdue, severe detrimental impact on the NRA (National Rifle Association) as a result of their ABOMINABLE Unmitigated Gun Peddling ~ Enterprise Car Rental & First National Bank of OMAHA have SEVERED any and all Ties with the Radical Rifle Organization who cares only about how many "GUNz, Bullets & Memberships" they can shove into circulation, not the innocent civilian “Body Count” these “Weapons of WAR” produce ~

“POWER to the Students” ~ We ALL understand that the students and advocates meeting with Mental Case RUSSIAN Poodle BOZO Trump & “Squinty Mike Pence” in the White House, both of whom will soon be counting prison bars in their sleep & “FETCHING” Bubba’s soap n’ wash-cloth if we still have LAWs, was a BIG Waste of TIME, just like trying to talk sense into “LIAR Weasel Marco Rubio” about Assault Weapons, but maybe, just maybe, if CORPORATIONs can hit the NRA in the wallet by SEVERING Ties with this barbaric group of weirdo degenerates like Wayne LaPierre & Ted "RETARD" Nugent, we can finally begin to “REIGN In & CURB” the out of control “Gun Distribution Epidemic” ~

Alternative Prime from > California on February 21, 2018:

MASSIVE ANTI-Trump, ANTI-Russian Republican & ANTI NRA Rally in Progress ~

Looks like our HIGH-School Youth understand the correct, unambiguous interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, unlike the Subversive Russian Republican Congress-persons who are doing everything within their power to make the USA LESS Safe, including recklessly granting explicit permission to Mentally ILL individuals to purchase AR-15's ~ Very NICE ~

The Students who are PROTESTING En-Masse today AGAINST Radical Republican GUN Ownership Insanity, understand a "Well Regulated Militia", as expressed in our 2nd AMENDMENT, translates to an Organized, Well Trained & Regulated ARMY or Police Force etc etc, not Buddy, Mel, Elmer, Jasper & Homer runnin' around the back-woods of Idaho with one hand on a machine gun to compensate for their obvious "LACK of Manhood", and the other tightly gripped on a gallon of home stewed moonshine ~

JOC (author) from Syracuse, NY on February 21, 2018:

I didn't see an issue with your comment. Not sure why they blocked it.

Wild Bill on February 21, 2018:

Hmmm, I guess that liberal agenda of suppressing information is in full force at HP. I guess the mods are paid by Hillary. lol

JOC (author) from Syracuse, NY on February 21, 2018:

Wild Bill...

Status: Admin Denied.

Someone way above me didn't like your comment.

Wild Bill on February 21, 2018:

So I add a balanced well thought out comment and you delete it? This is why we can’t have open discussions about issues. Too many people are closed minded about their opinions.

JOC (author) from Syracuse, NY on February 18, 2018:

https://agingmillennialengineer.wordpress.com/2018...

JOC (author) from Syracuse, NY on February 18, 2018:

Brad, I'm more than happy to go back and forth. When you ask six or seven different questions in a single post, then that's not really arguing a point. An example is you asked why I think Trump's a fascist, then why I thought he was anti white (which I never said - I said he's anti-everyone not white), then ask for commentary on other parts of your article. That's a lot of jumping around.

And what I originally said, was our differences might lead to a string of Articles, not that I was interested per se in going back and forth in the comments sections. Some commentary might have led to interesting full articles based on our differences.

As for examples of gun control already in existence and limited certain weapons, in NY and Connecticut, there are bans on semi-automatic weapons and high capacity magazine already. NY's SAFE Act was upheld by SCOTUS when they refused to hear pro-gun arguments.

Brad on February 17, 2018:

JOC

I thought you were serious about this point and counter point.This comment of yours doesn't say that.

I wrote an article, you commented on half of it, I asked you to comment on the other half and you didn't.

You didn't respond to my points here, but distract with your last comment.

States don't get to define the constitution, that is for SCOTUS to say, and as of yet they haven't decided. But the purpose of the founders for the second amendment was the militia. And having military grade weapons is consistent with a militia.

It was a protection made by the founders to protect the people from having the government take over the country.

The current state of the government is looking pretty unAmerican. And a militia would be useful in case there is a conflict between the government and the people.

Like in countries that decide that they can take the voting places away, so there is no place to cast your vote.

----------------

In the twenty-first century, the amendment has been subjected to renewed academic inquiry and judicial interest. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision that held the amendment protects an individual right to possess and carry firearms. In McDonald v. Chicago (2010), the Court clarified its earlier decisions that limited the amendment's impact to a restriction on the federal government, expressly holding that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment against state and local governments. In Caetano v. Massachusetts (2016), the Supreme Court reiterated its earlier rulings that "the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding" and that its protection is not limited to "only those weapons useful in warfare".

Bye.

JOC (author) from Syracuse, NY on February 17, 2018:

Your previous comments were too scattered to address without writing a whole new article and not just replying in a comments section.

As for specific limitations, fully automatic has already been made in various states. The fact that those were upheld shows that the 2nd amendment can have limitations.

Brad on February 17, 2018:

JOC

I thought we were going to do point and counter point. You seemed to missed the one before this.

There is limitations to all of the amendments, but what specifically do you think applies to the 2nd Amendment.

And again, there is no explicit right to alcohol and tobacco and both of them are known killers.

And how does any of this say that gun control is a solution.

Back to you. :)

JOC (author) from Syracuse, NY on February 17, 2018:

Hey Brad...there is a constitutional amendment for free speech, but there are still types of speech that are limited. Just because it's an amendment doesn't preclude limitations.

Brad on February 17, 2018:

JOC

I wrote this on my articles comments.

The difference between Alcohol, Tobacco and Guns is that only Guns have rights from a constitutional amendment. There is no constitutional right for alcohol or tobacco.

Alternative Prime from > California on February 17, 2018:

FYI to ALL ~ STRONG, Massive ANTI-Trump / ANTI-Republican Resistance RALLY Erupting in Florida today in the aftermath of that HORRIFIC Mass Shooing which of course was in part FACILITATED by Mr. Trump, CON-Man Paul Ryan, Decrepit Mitch McConnell & Russian CONTROLLED Congressional Republicans ~

It's Covered LIVE NOW ~

REMEMBER? Short Timer "Delusional Donald" RESCINDED the Obama Order which made it MORE Difficult for Mentally ILL Individuals to buy gunz ~ Consequences Consequences ~

Brad on February 16, 2018:

JOC

Even if the US banned all guns today, it would be generations before all guns were removed from criminal gangs given the incredible numbers (probably topping a billion) already in circulation. Additionally, there are brilliant men and women who are "pro gun" who'd simply set up clandestine operations in their garages and basements to make new ones

Remember we are not talking about law abiding gun owners, we are talking about people that want to commit criminal acts using guns. Terrorists fit into that category.

We have gun control laws, and immigration laws and what is true about both of these laws is that they are not really being enforced.

And an assault rifle can kill a lot more than 17 people, why didn't it? Any number of deaths is tragic, but with millions of gun owners in the country the number of shootings should by much more than it is unless most of these gun owners are law abiding citizens, and many of them have 4 t0 8 weapons themselves.

Kenna McHugh from Northern California on February 16, 2018:

All mass shootings were done by individuals on psychotropic drugs. Read the effects of taking these perscription drugs.

Brad on February 16, 2018:

Joc

You were doing pretty good in the beginning then you left the track

"What about the threat of a tyrannical government? Believe me, with a fascist like Donald Trump in the White House, I've actually considered going out and buying my own AR-15. He's so obviously partisan and anti-everyone not white, heck anyone not willing to kiss his rear-end, that it's only a matter of time until we're living the movie V for Vendetta. That being said, I'll wait to hear the conclusion of the Mueller investigation before determining how much danger the opposition is truly in."

B:

Why is Trump a Facist? What has he done that is Facism?

What has he done that you claim he is partisan? He is disliked by democats and republicans, and that is the reason I like him. Democrats and Republicans are two sides of the same coin. Trump is his own coin. And it was both the democrats and republicans working together and against each other that brought country down, especially 2008.

What has he done that is anti white? The 7 countries that he wanted the TEMPorary travel ban was mostly Muslim, and so are the terrorists that are infested in those countries. If it were truly a Muslim ban than it would have include all 47 Muslim Countries.

He wants a Wall to keep out the Terrorists, Drug Cartels, and other criminals. Enforcing existing immigration laws is what a president is supposed to do. Look at what president Bill Clinton said about the illegal aliens and tell me how it differs from president Trump.

Mueller has a lot of explaining to do on what he did when he was FBI director.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You didn't comment on the last half of my article.

BTW, the Alcohol prohibition also tells you why taking guns out of the picture is not a solution, it is just increasing the Drug Cartels gun running business.

Thanks for doing this.

JOC (author) from Syracuse, NY on February 16, 2018:

We're not talking about youths, gang members, and active criminals here. We're talking about lone wolf mass shooters.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/03/us/...

Dean Traylor from Southern California/Spokane, Washington (long story) on February 16, 2018:

Hey there. A couple of years ago, I wrote two articles pertaining to gun control. They took on historical perspectives and may add a bit to the current debate.

One dealt with the wild west, which wasn't all that wild https://discover.hubpages.com/politics/Law-Enforce...

And the other deals with a myth that unfortunately gets reported as fact.

https://soapboxie.com/social-issues/Hitler-and-Gun...

Readmikenow on February 16, 2018:

More laws will only punish the law abiding.

"The guns carried and misused by youths, gang members and active criminals are more likely than not obtained by transactions that violate federal or state law"

http://theconversation.com/how-dangerous-people-ge...

JOC (author) from Syracuse, NY on February 16, 2018:

I, too, was involved with guns at an early age. I remember skeet shooting when I was around ten or eleven. And I'll even agree that culture plays a huge part in the evolution of mass shootings.

Why do citizens need semi-automatic, high capacity weapons though? Criminals can still get guns doesn't really apply as much to the lone wolf. And doesn't putting another difficult step in gaining access to these types of guns make it harder for them to achieve their goal of killing lots of people. Isn't that a good thing?

Alternative Prime from > California on February 16, 2018:

Where do you even begin with this SUBJECT ?? WHY not start with the 2cnd Amendment which is actually a “BAN” on Arms except for “Militia Personnel” i,e, Army, national Guard, Police etc ~ So here it is “trumpeteers”, the COMPLETE Amendment ~ READ it & WEEP ~

“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.” ~

So, in REALITY, according to the Constitution which is simply a useless piece of discoloring paper during “Delusional Donald’s” DANGEROUS Pseudo-Presidency which Thank GOD appears to be nearing an ABRUPT End via Criminal Investigations, an individual must be associated with a “Well Regulated Militia” to possess arms ~ This is called a "CONDITION Precedent" in legal terms ~

But somehow, someway over the decades, this unambiguous passage was Grossly PERVERTED by Frightened Right Wing Nut-Jobs who are in their Insecure MINDs, constantly “BATTLING” some “INVISIBLE Boogie-Man”, hence their PHONEY Need to Stock Up on Machine Guns, Bazookas & other useless War-Time Paraphernalia ~

BTW ~ The Little Russian Poodle with that “RIDICULOUS Looking Yellow COMB-Over” who is aimlessly roaming OUR Oval Office as we speak, along with his accomplices CON-Man Paul Ryan & Decrepit Mitch McConnell REVERSED an Obama E.O. which made it more difficult for individuals who are incapable of handling their finances, to purchase GUNz ~

So, essentially BOZO Drumpf & CONservative Politicians who could CARE LESS about you, your families, or SCHOOL Safety are to BLAME for ALL Mass Shootings over the past year, and we’ve experienced a HISTORICAL Up-Tick in Mass Shootings since the “Sickle & Hammer CLOWN in Chief” was embedded within OUR White House by Vladimir Putin ~

Readmikenow on February 16, 2018:

Mass shootings on this scale didn't start to occur until the 1980s. I grew up with guns in the house. Everybody had a gun. They were Christmas gifts, birthday gifts and something you showed to your friend with pride. I can remember somebody giving a report on their Winchester rifle. He brought it to class and nobody gave it a second thought. I suggest laws will do no good. They will only take guns away from those who obey the law. The problem is not with the law, it's our culture. When did guns go from something you enjoyed, and would never have thought to shoot someone, to something common people use to shoot innocent people? There were no mass shootings when prayers were permitted in school, but that probably is a wasted thought on most people. We didn't have mass shooting before we had video games that glorified being a criminal and worse. No, it is a cultural problem and I don't see a resolution.

A friend from the Ukraine is now rethinking his trip to the United States, he's scared. I try to explain things to him, but it's wasted. He believes our country is now like living in the breakaway republics in Eastern Ukraine. I don't think he's too far off.

JOC (author) from Syracuse, NY on February 15, 2018:

I'd like to remove semi-automatic, high capacity weapons from the average citizen. I think the military and law enforcement should be the only ones who have them. I know the argument, criminals will still get them. I'm more concerned about the lone wolf person who snaps more than the criminals at this point.

Does anyone else find it odd that cars are more well regulated than guns?

Ralph Schwartz from Idaho Falls, Idaho on February 15, 2018:

I’d like to hear more about what you describe as “gun control” - does it mean more background checks, registration, etc. or does it mean a ban on firearms, or something in between. It’s difficult to agree or disagree with you until you’ve specified.

Related Articles