By Alex White
Executive Opinion Editor
After the recent shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, it has become clear that further firearm regulation is necessary to keep Americans safe against senseless violence, especially school shootings.
Advocates of gun rights attempt to deflect the focus away from the regulation toward the underlying causes of gun violence. While this approach makes sense, and factors such as a failing mental health system and a glamorizing media do play a part, federal and state governments should work to place more restrictions on deadly weapons. Or, at the very least, they should take smaller measures, like reducing the size of magazines, which would come with the passage of President Barack Obama’s proposed legislation.
Some opponents of gun regulation believe that it is the portrayal of violence in the media, namely movies and video games, that lead to mass shootings, not access to guns. However, studies that compared the United States to other modern countries say the opposite. According to the Washington Post, the Netherlands and South Korea both spend more than double the amount of money per capita on video games, but see less than one-sixth of the firearm-related murders. The difference between the U.S. and both nations is simply the more lax regulation in the U.S.
The real debate should be over how far firearm regulation measures should go. Assault weapons were invented for the military, not the American communities. A ban on these weapons that can spread such gross amounts of violence so quickly is simply common sense.
Additionally, regulation should be made to limit the use of handguns, as opposed to long guns such as rifles and assault weapons. Handguns accounted for over 90% of firearm murders in 2011, according to the Centers for Disease Control. Restricting handgun use would go a very long way in limiting total firearm homicides due to the objects to be concealed and their comparatively large ammunition magazines. Finally, penalties for those who cannot safely keep and store their weapons should be installed at the federal and state levels in order to help prevent future tragedies like Newtown.
But, if an assault weapons’ ban is too drastic, a middle ground should be found. Making magazines smaller would make handguns more functional for self defense than attacking others.
President Obama proposed fire arm regulation legislation in January to reenter the assault weapons ban and to limit magazines clips to 10 rounds, both of which are excellent ways to prevent future firearm disasters. It also goes even further to include better mental health services in schools, helping attack the problem at its source. While the bill may be met with opposition in Congress, it must be passed in order to achieve substantial change that will help save American lives.
At Mira Costa, things are excellent in terms of student safety. Apart from being in a safe community with good access to mental health resources both on and off campus, like Costa’s guidance counselors, the administration and security do a good job of keeping students safe. There are rarely security issues, and when there are they are handled quickly. Giving firearms to safety officials on campus is unlikely to prevent a tragedy, especially when these weapons would be able to be out-matched by intruders’ equipment. The best way to make the Costa campus safe is to make the entire country safe. An assault weapons’ ban or limits on the use of handguns would greatly decrease the amount of damage a shooter could do in a short period of time and would give security a much better chance at effectively stopping threats.
It has taken too many tragedies for the citizens of the United States to respond to gun violence, and comprehensive action should be taken as quickly as possible. Costa’s campus is already safe, and change in legislation would be the best option to make Costa even more secure from danger moving forward.
Leave a Reply