Friday, Dec. 21, 2012 over 200 students from JSC, an elementary school in central Pennsylvania were called off school with various excuses. No doubt, many were coming down with the flu. Some did have dentist appointments. A few may have left early to visit relatives for the holidays. But most of those 200 students stayed home: their parents fearing a tragedy would befall their school, as well. That day marked the one-week anniversary of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.
Gun violence is neither new nor any more of a threat than it was at its dawn, but the recent attacks on schools, families and children have sent the country into frantic debate. Should guns be regulated more, therefore limiting the rights of the people or should the people take safety into their own hands?
But ask yourself this: would gun control really have prevented the Sandy Hook shooting? Did James Holmes, who wounded and killed nearly 70 people in Aurora, but affected thousands, buy only legal weapons? Would Gabrielle Giffords’s attempted assassin simply forget his animosity if he couldn’t find a gun?
No. Adam Lanza’s mental condition was not triggered by the gun he possessed, only enabled. Holmes’ arsenal contained several weapons of higher caliber than one can find at a local gun shop. Jared Loutner’s poorly-executed attack on the Congresswoman was personally motivated and he was driven to complete the task.
The problem wasn’t the guns that these men carried, but the men. The cliché got it right: guns don’t kill people, people kill people. The men who committed these atrocities would not have decided that without a gun the acts just weren’t worth it.
Few people actually believe that gun control will effectively protect the American people. To take weapons from citizens may, in fact, do just the opposite: make them defenseless in the face of danger, to say nothing of rights.
“If you are in a room full of people and everyone has a gun, and you know everyone has a gun, no one is going to start shooting, because you will be dead in a minute,” sophomore Meghan Donohue said.
That isn’t to say that it is necessary to keep military-grade firearms in a personal residence; a hand gun and single, loaded clip would suffice. But, governmental regualtions that seemingly strip Americans of their “God-given” right to bear arms would incite retailiation and possibly even a stronger wave of violence.
Murder is already illegal, in case you didn’t know. But it still happens. Theft is illegal, but it happens. The sale of marijuania is illegal, but it happens. So why would guns prove any different?
If protecting oneself is necessary, then by all means, use your weapon proudly, but please, be smart about it. Yes, an AK-47 would stop an intruder, but so would a pistol.