Guns, Second Amendment, And Mass Shootings

Some of the most notable shootings have occurred in the United States since Columbine in 1999. For starters, the deadliest mass shooting in the United States happened On April 2007, when student Seung-Hui Cho shot and killed 32 people and wounded 15 others at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Virginia.

February 2008–A man opened fire at Northern Illinois University in Dekalb, Illinois, shooting 22 people.  16 people were wounded and five students were killed. The gunman was said to have carried a shotgun.

September 2008–After being released from jail one month earlier, a mentally ill man shot eight people in Alger, Washington, leaving six people dead and two wounded.

March 2009–A laid-off worker opened fire while driving a car through several towns in Alabama. At least 10 people were killed. The gunman was armed with a semi-automatic weapon.

April 2009–At a civic center in Binghamton, New York, a man shot 13 people to death and critically wounded four others using two pistols and a satchel of ammunition.

February 2010–50 minutes into a Biological Sciences Department faculty meeting at the University of Alabama, a professor opened fire, killing three colleagues and wounding three others.

January 2011–At a gathering outside a grocery in Tuscon, Arizona where Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was making a speech, a gunman opened fire, killing six people and wounding at least 12 people, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.

August 2012–White supremacists, Wade Michael Page, shot and killed six people at Slkh temple in Wisconsin.

So how do we respond to repeated tragedies when supporters of loose gun laws are refusing to talk about reforming the country’s Second Amendment? Truth is, there are enough guns for every man, woman and child in this country, how much safer do we need to feel?

The weapons chosen for these rampages are military style weapons and pistols with high capacity. They were designed as armed forces; the compensation was the weapon fired more rapidly and put much more ammunition on the target. This seems like a good argument as to why we should reform our gun control laws.

Since the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, President Barack Obama has promised “to send Congress broad proposals in January tightening gun laws and curbing violence,” according to an article by the Huffington Post. For years, gun control measures have faced resistance at every turn but can no longer avoid proposals to stricter gun laws. Democrats and Republicans alike have all signaled their willingness to consider new measures. Along with firearms’ restrictions, White House officials will also look at ways to keep guns from being glamorized in Magazines and television ads.

As Washington looks to prevent another mass shooting, the National Rifle Association (NRA) has agreed to take meaningful steps to help make gun ownership more difficult and more restrictive.

But let’s talk about ways to create stricter gun laws: one thing the Supreme Court can do is to change the law. In 2008 and 2010, “the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment protected an individual’s right to own a gun for lawful purposes, most especially, in self-defense of their home,” according to an article by the Huffington Post. What it boils down to is that you can’t ban gun ownership. But it doesn’t mean that the Constitution cannot be contorted for lawful purposes.

Although the Second Amendment adhere’s to the rules, self-defense would need to be one of the primary reasons to owning a gun. Under the law, there should be restrictions to the number of guns that individuals can have for home self-defense.

Anyone with a criminal record, or who is voluntarily and involuntarily committed to a mental institution would have their license suspended, or at least until there is a hearing.

Guns should not be sold to anyone who does not possess a license to own, and no one should sell a gun unless they are registered and licensed. Possession of a gun without proper documents would lead to a civil fine, and possibly jail time as well.

Though banning guns would not completely solve the problem, it will bring violent acts to an end.

 

 

About Marcelle Hutchins

I am a Freelance Journalist and I provide important data and information to the public through Mytimetovote.
This entry was posted in Facts and Quotes and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Guns, Second Amendment, And Mass Shootings

  1. Marcelle Hutchins says:

    Thank you for your response. Keep following us and show your support.

  2. Dukes says:

    A BFA in creative writing is right. What you wrote is mostly fiction and wishful thinking.

    You said, “Though banning guns would not completely solve the problem, it will bring violent acts to an end.”

    No it will not Timothy McVeigh killed 168 people, including 19 CHILDREN in a daycare center at the Murrah Federal building in 1995. It will just change the methods. The criminals and the crazies will still have weapons, I suppose we can throw idiots like you at them.

    you said, “Although the Second Amendment adhere’s to the rules, self-defense would need to be one of the primary reasons to owning a gun. Under the law, there should be restrictions to the number of guns that individuals can have for home self-defense.”

    NO! The only acceptable thing would to be to amend and clarify the Second Amendment to the Constitution. How many guns would you allow? What kind?

Comments are closed.