Rachel Sullivan
In the past year, several acts of gun violence have caused a renewed debate over gun control laws. Most notable among these cases is the shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman in a supposed act of self-defense. This November, 19-year-old Renisha McBride was shot and killed by Theodore Wafer. McBride approached Wafer’s home for help after backing into a parked car in Dearborn Heights, Mich. and was shot before she could reach the porch. In the past week alone, shootings have occurred at Purdue University and South Carolina State University, both resulting in one death; shootings also took place in a Philadelphia high school and a New Mexico middle school. I maintain that these recent acts of violence necessitate a reexamination of both America’s gun laws and society’s attitude towards mental illness.
If Americans possess guns at all, both the type of weapon and the individual owning the gun should be closely examined. The Second Amendment states that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” Gun rights adherents employ this passage to support their position, but in reality, the founders referred only to gun ownership for an organized militia, not for private citizens. I do not argue for a complete ban on all guns; such a measure would be so poorly received by the American public that it would undoubtedly lead to increased violence.
However, I do favor a ban on handguns. Currently, 67 percent of murders are committed with firearms. Chicago’s 1982 ban on handguns has resulted in a steady decline in homicides, and is currently 17 percent lower than in 1982. Gun control adherents will cite a similar ban implemented in Washington, D.C. in 1976, which resulted in a 76 percent increase in homicides. The ban was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2008, but this increase in gun violence was not caused by the ban itself, instead by the fact that criminals could easily purchase guns outside of the D.C. area and bring them into the city. A ban on handguns must be national for it to be effective; it will undoubtedly result in a lower national homicide rate.
Banning handguns, however, will not individually be effective enough to see a large decrease in homicides. I believe that the larger issue is the ease with which individuals with mental illnesses or the intent to murder can obtain guns, by both legal and illegal means. Therefore, I argue for strict background and medical checks and gun safety training when a gun is purchased. The vast majority of criminals who commit murders with guns obtain these weapons from family members; because of this, an investigation into the mental health gun owner’s immediate family should be required as well. All gun owners should be educated on gun safety and required to store their weapons in locked, secure areas. Furthermore, education to promote the understanding, detection and treatment of mental illness in America should be increased.
Gun rights adherents claim that “Guns don’t kill people. People with guns kill people.” This may be the case, but it is currently far too easy for those with the intent to murder to obtain these weapons.