The issue of gun control is complex, highly politicized, and fraught with misinformation.
It is true that guns on their own, without a human operative, do not kill anyone. In fact, as benign objects, they pose no threat to anyone. Guns don’t kill people; people kill people.
It is also true that people are capable of unimaginable violence and are anything but benign objects. People are willful, arrogant, fearful, unstable, unpredictable agents of action. We are all frequently surprised by the actions of others. And it seems that man’s inhumanity to man knows no limit. People kill people.
It is also true that regardless of what is available, people who intend harm and are willing to be both patient and methodical will find a way to inflict harm on others one way or another. We can neither ban nor regulate all objects that may be used as weapons of harm. A quick Google search reveals that people have harmed and killed others with some rather surprising, benign, everyday objects that no one would argue should be banned or regulated in the same way that some are proposing should apply to guns in general and certain kinds of guns in particular.
It is also true that we regulate people’s access to things that undoubtedly pose a threat to human life. We keep track of and regulate people’s access to certain pharmaceutical drugs for this reason. Upon discovering that a drug is deadly, it is recalled, banned, and lawyers quickly create ads encouraging those harmed by the drug to sue the offending drug company for restitution. Drugs deemed safe for human consumption that are used correctly are generally harmless but if abused are deadly. Because of the potential harm at the hands of human operators, drugs themselves as well as the methods in which people access them are controlled and regulated. Certain drugs not only require a prescription but also the amount and frequency of their purchase are tracked and regulated. Drugs kill people; therefore, we regulate drugs.
It also true that the example above applies to many objects such as cars, boats, chemicals, tools, fireworks, knives, fantasy weapons, and so on. When we recognize that an object possesses the potential to be catastrophically harmful in the hands of human operators, we generally take extensive measures in order to know who owns and operates the object as well as when, where, and how the object may be purchased as well as used.
It is also true that guns were and are designed and manufactured with the express intent of killing. There is no denying this. Is it possible to purchase and use a gun for another purpose? Sure. Some participate in Trap Shooting competitions. However, Trap Shooting events regulate the kind of gun and ammunition used. There are also specific rules imposed at Trap Shooting events intended to protect participants, judges, and spectators because the equipment for this sport, typically a 12 gauge shotgun, is lethal. Because of the rules and regulations at Trap Shooting events, I don’t know of anyone being killed while participating, judging, or attending one. These are controlled and regulated events in order to ensure the safety of all involved.
It is also true that some people purchase collectible guns for display or investment, and they are never armed nor fired. These also tend to remain benign, generally harmless objects because they remain under lock and key.
It is also true that criminals buy guns illegally. Hence the terms “criminal” and “illegally.” We do not, however, have a habit of rescinding laws simply on the basis of people breaking them. To argue that criminals will get guns anyway is neither a logical nor a common sense reason to weaken gun laws.
It is also true that there is no evidence to support the “good guy with a gun” theory when the “good guy” is a random citizen who happens to be armed at the time and in the place a shooting occurs. Being able to respond quickly, reasonably, effectively, efficiently, and accurately to an incident of violence, particularly when guns are involved, takes time, training, and skill. Few people have a natural proclivity for handling such stress. A Concealed Handgun License is insufficient for the kind of training needed to handle these intensely stressful events.
It is also true that Guns Everywhere laws have not proven to be deterrents to gun violence. Instead, stressful situations that would have otherwise ended in a verbal exchange or perhaps even a fist fight quickly turn deadly when guns are ready and available.
It is also true that gun homicides in general are down while mass shootings in particular are on the rise. The Psychology of mass shootings is complex and multifaceted. There are no simple solutions to the problem of gun violence. Shooters have had a range of reasons for and circumstances surrounding their decision to open fire on others. We cannot and should not discount mental illness or terrorism, but they in themselves are complex issues that require complex solutions.
It is also true that resorting to trite statements by both Liberals and Conservatives alike that polarize citizens for the sake of political and ideological alliances will not and cannot even begin to solve this issue. The blame game does not help. When we allow ourselves to be consumed with either defending or attacking what racial, religious, or political group a shooter supposedly represents, we lose sight of the issue at hand.
It is also true that the Second Amendment, as it was written and when it was written, is no longer meaningful. In order for the Second Amendment to be relevant in our modern, advanced nation with a vast Military, National Guard, and state as well as local police, it needs to be amended in order to reflect how the country has changed both culturally and structurally as well as technologically.
It is also true that we must address the issue of gun violence with action. 353 mass shootings in 11 months is more than a tragedy; it is a result of gross negligence on the part of lawmakers and their constituents alike. We should not allow this level of gun violence to become the new normal. There are nations that address gun rights and gun control in ways that gun violence is reduced without violating citizens’ gun rights. We must be willing to say that we will not allow mass shootings to remain a daily norm and back that statement up with legislation and enforcement. We must be willing to make some changes if we want different outcomes.
It is true that guns on their own are not dangerous. It is true that people use guns to kill. It is true that we limit people’s access to items that pose a lethal threat to themselves or others. How can any reasonable person assume that this does not and should not apply to guns? It is true that we need to implement laws that will help reduce gun violence by limiting and regulating people’s access to them. It is true that not everyone will like the law. It is true that no new law can guarantee 100% protection against mass shootings in particular or gun violence in general. It is true that our aim is to drive the overall trend of gun violence and mass shootings downward rather than upwards and that a single incident – though tragic – is not indicative of an upward rather than downward trend nor an absolute failure of the law. Therefore, isolated events if and when they occur should not be heralded as a failure of gun legislation. To determine a laws success or failure takes time and patience.
It is true that if we set political, racial, social, and religious ideologies aside and come together as a nation determined to confront this problem, then we may actually do something about it. It is true that doing nothing about gun violence guarantees that nothing will change.
I would like to think that it is true that Americans are not the kind of people who look at a problem and say that it is too hard and too complex to solve and therefore would rather do nothing as opposed to something. It is true that we need to do something. We need to set aside hate and fear and come to the table of discourse in order to reach a solution together.
Dr. Kinkead 