Gun reform and legislation has been a hot topic of discussion for years, crossing over administrations and polarizing both voters and lawmakers alike on either side of the issue. The more conservative side of opinion argues that disarming citizens is an outright violation of the 2nd Amendment, while those who push for stricter gun control say that the lives of our citizens is more valuable than upholding the amendment.
Wherever voters dig in on their respective sides of the argument, there is a need for full examination into the effects of instituting new and/or stricter gun laws. In light of a heightened number of mass shootings with frightening frequency, more Democrats and gun control supporters are pushing hard for changes such as universal background checks and assault rifle bans.
However, it’s important to dig into the details of this legislation. Gun reform is not a process that can be rushed, as has been proven repeatedly in recent years. Much complication muddies the water, from lobbyist support of organizations such as the National Rifle Organization to roadblocks on the path to initiating government buybacks or stiffer background checks. Therefore, it’s the duty of Congress to examine every aspect of potential gun legislation to ensure that it has the effects needed as well as puts restrictions into place that will serve to better protect our citizens.
A greater sense of urgency has prevailed with gun reform activists. Much of this pressure comes from an alarming trend of extremist activity on the dark web. A pattern of behavior often emerges from these shooters: a “lone wolf” type of white male who posts an expletive and violence riddled manifesto of sorts online before going out to destroy the lives of innocent people. Often, students and minorities are caught in the crosshairs and give up their lives to these deranged individuals.
Indeed, some of the proposed solutions to gun violence have ramifications themselves. Rushing into a decision to pass a band-aid type of solution may in fact create more problems than it solves. Another argument against hastily rushing into new gun legislation is that the ultimate objective here is safety and ability to implement. A far-fetched, bold proposal on legislation, such as an all-out ban on assault rifles, may be so difficult to actually implement that it never actually helps anything.
The right to self-defense is a real right that Americans have. It’s how our Constitution was designed. Making even incremental changes can have a farther reaching effect on this right, which is where many citizens push back against stricter gun control. Finding a solution that does not infringe on rights but that also puts protections into place against violent offenders should be the priority.
No one wants to see innocent lives lost. No one wants to have a loved one lost to the ill effects of gun ownership. Therefore, proper diligence must be done to identify a path forward that allows for better regulation of firearms while also staying true to the American idea of self-defense and the right to bear arms. While the gun laws may need some updating, hasty change can have the exact opposite effect of what it is we’re all trying to accomplish as a country.
The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, yet many sheriffs across the country feel that laws within their states are violating that amendment. Read more here.