As I was finishing my column for this week, I woke up Friday morning to see that eight people had died following a mass shooting in Indianapolis. The shooting, which left several people injured, occurred at a FedEx facility. The shooter, a 19-year-old man who was employed by FedEx in 2020, died by apparent suicide. Reading this news, I nearly punched my computer. I am struggling to remain levelheaded while continuing to write this column.
Like many political issues in America, gun control has been highly contested and controversial for a long time, certainly since I have been alive. But after the shootings in Indianapolis, in Atlanta and in Boulder, Colorado, I think it is apparent that legislators need to make legitimate, legal changes to prevent more deaths.
Critics of gun regulation often push the narrative that we should be punishing the people who pulled the trigger, not focusing on regulation. While it is obvious that mass shooters must be held accountable for the lives they took, I think that it is naive to believe that current gun laws — or lack thereof — are not also part of the problem.
Since eight people were killed in Atlanta on March 16, there have been at least 45 mass shootings in the U.S. This number is staggering, and I was honestly shocked while researching to see just how high the number of mass shootings within the past month is. For clarification, a shooting is characterized as a mass shooting when four or more people are shot, wounded or killed.
The first mass shooting I vividly remember was the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012. I was in sixth grade, and even though I knew virtually nothing about gun laws, I thought that a massive change would occur when it came to who was able to own guns. After all, 26 students and teachers were massacred in cold blood while at school. The tragic deaths of 20 children would make legislatures wake up to the problematic nature of current gun laws, right?
Following the Parkland shooting in 2018, the House of Representatives passed two gun control measures. The first aimed to extend background checks to the private sales of guns, and the second aimed to extend the time limit of background checks. Both of these measures, however, were crushed by the Senate.
It is true that the Constitution of the United States permits people to own guns, but more than 12,000 people have been killed as a result of gun violence in 2021 alone, per the Gun Violence Archive. It is paramount that more regulation occurs when it comes to who can own a gun. There needs to be a more rigorous and intense psychological evaluation of individuals who want to receive their gun licenses, and I don’t think that a person should be able to keep assault weapons in their house, even with a license. I am aware that some think that would impede their constitutional rights, but with the number of innocent lives that have been taken by people using these weapons, I think it is obvious that drastic change needs to be made.
UMN0001
Apr 21, 2021 at 1:08 pm
@Tara – I am curious if you understand the definition of an “assault” weapon which you suggest many people have in their home. An “assault” weapon is generally defined as a semi or fully-automatic weapon. Very few people own these. Most AR-15s in the US are rifles where only 1 round is discharged with each trigger pull. Hunting rifles, hand guns, etc. are the same. Furthermore, “AR” does not stand for “Assault Rifle”.
People in support of gun control typically have misinformation spread by news outlet “trigger” words (pun intended) like “Glock”, “AR”, high capacity magazines, etc. Anything over 10 rounds is typically considered “high capacity”. Would you be concerned about my XD-S 9mm hand gun? It can hold 9 rounds in the magazine plus 1 in the chamber. I carry this up north for protection against bears. Every single round I fire, I need to pull the trigger. Just like 99% of the “mass” shootings in the US. Does this weapon meet your list to ban?
A Gopher
Apr 19, 2021 at 5:23 pm
I have a CCW permit, but if I bring my Glock onto campus I could be subject to the campus-wide discipline policy. And since students want police abolished who do they think will protect them from the next mass shooting or robbery. Allow students, staff, and faculty to conceal and carry on campus, just in case. CCW permit holders must undergo training, demonstrate firearm competence, and have state-issued permits, which is more than you can say for the average gun owner or criminal so what do we have to lose by allowing those folks to carry?
Keith
Apr 19, 2021 at 3:26 pm
Extending the time limit of a background check would do nothing. Someone intent on killing would just wait a few more days. And how exactly would a psychological evaluation prior to purchase be implemented?
The fact is there are over 400 million guns in America. A criminal who wants one, can get one.
And banning assault rifles? The biggest school shooting in American history (Virginia tech) was done with handguns.
Bottom line, mandatory gun confiscation and banning of all guns except a few hunting rifles is the only thing that would make much difference. We’d have a civil war over it, but you’d probably reduce mass shootings.