Banning guns not solution to violence

In the aftermath of many tragic shootings, many politicians have concluded that it is the responsibility of the government to end gun violence. Our over-reaching Big Brother now believes that the solution to gun violence is to ban guns. There are many reasons as to why banning guns is not the right choice.
For starters, sorry, Mr. President, but you do not hold the legislative powers. Historically, many presidents have used executive orders for a plethora of purposes. However, Obama is now attempting to circumvent Congress in passing new gun regulations. Whatever happens, Congress must be the one to debate and pass a bill, and then the president may sign or veto it.
One popular proposal is to ban certain equipment. Assault weapons and large magazines have been proposed to be put on the cutting block. These weapons are designed to kill, especially in a war setting. However, banning these weapons would be difficult. The border with Mexico is far from closed, so nothing would keep assault weapons such as AK-47s from entering the US.
Also, the founders intended the Constitution’s Second Amendment as a way for citizens to defend themselves with the same kind of weaponry that a burglar or other potential threat would use. Since criminals have access to assault weapons, law-abiding citizens should be able to defend themselves with the same weapons. The Clinton-era assault rifle ban should not be renewed.
Back when we were still under British rule, the advanced gun, or “assault” weapon, was the flintlock rifle. In 1774, the British first banned importation of firearms and ammuniton. They then decided to attempt confiscation of such weapons. Come 1775, the British were dealing with a revolution.
New York’s new law reduces the number of rounds in a clip from 10 to seven rounds. If a law-abiding New Yorker removes those three rounds, what would happen when he has fired all seven rounds at a burglar, only to need those last three rounds because the burglar is still coming at him? Such a law does nothing to solve gun violence and puts citizens at greater risk. Some might argue that the best way for a woman to stop a rapist is with a gun.
More extensive background checks are always an option. However, the NRA has taken a stance of opposing background checks. Its argument is that criminals can get guns by other means and background checks only hinder law-abiding citizens. Still, background checks are common-sense measures. For law enforcement, having guns registered helps when trying to solve crimes.
Many criminals use guns, but there are many weapons available. Guns are not what kill people; people kill people. Evil minds and hearts are the enemy, and a gun is just one method for a killer to use. A machete in the hand of a criminal is just as dangerous as any gun.
Although they do not use assault weapons, hunters and sportsmen use guns. Not only does hunting provide food, it also helps keep the deer population reigned in. Imagine the influx of wrecks that would occur if hunting of deer was ended. Sportsmen use weapons for target practice, and trap-shooting is a popular sport in the Midwest and elsewhere.
The NRA is viewed often as a hunters and sportsmen organization. However, many members of the NRA are neither of these. Most gun owners keep guns for self-defense. We always hear of the crimes committed using guns, but we rarely hear of the crimes prevented with guns. According to the Jan. 21 Time magazine, guns were used 180,000 times in the United States in 2012 to prevent crimes. The police are good people, but sometimes one cannot wait for them to arrive. According to the Daily Caller, the average response time of a 911 call is 23 minutes, as opposed to the 1,400 feet per second of a .357 Magnum.
If guns are being demonized, the American culture must also be considered. How many children grow up playing violent video games? What about watching movies with violence? I do not blame Hollywood or games for violence, but these are legitimate points.
In America, we believe in personal responsibility. Individuals are responsible for their own actions, including acts of violence.
Guns, large clips and culture are not the enemies. As Benjamin Franklin said: “Any society which gives up a little liberty to gain a little security deserves neither and loses both.”
The Nazis in Germany had some of the toughest gun-control laws ever. A huge reason for their defeat was that occupied people hid guns to later use against the Nazis. If it were not for brave people with guns, Hitler could have done much more evil. Chicago has one of the toughest gun laws in the United States, but Chicago now has the most gun violence of any American city.
Intuition is probably correct in telling us something must be done. Perhaps the best option is the NRA’s suggestion of putting armed guards in schools, malls and other places instead of having gun-free zones. Locking doors may also help. More background checks and greater aid to the mentally ill should also be beneficial.
FOX News commentator Bill O’Reilly has proposed federalizing all gun crimes and instituting a minimum 10-year jail sentence. Such strong punishment for criminals would be a good deterrent.
There should be conversations about what should be done to curb gun violence as much as possible. Studies should be conducted to find what works and what does not. I am confident that America will find a solution that does not infringe on gun rights.