We are officially three weeks into 2014, and another school shooting has made it into the news headlines. This afternoon, a man was killed in a Purdue University classroom. This comes just days after a school in New Mexico saw themselves dealing with a school shooter, who shot 2 people. This shooting happened the day after a man was shot in a movie theater by someone who was a retired Tampa Bay cop. In October of 2013, a Nevada middle schooler entered his school with a gun, shooting 2 students and killing a teacher. This happened 2 months before the 1 year anniversary of the shooting of 26 students and teachers at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut, as well as his mother.
These are only a few of the schools that have been impacted by school shootings, and these stats don’t even begin to include the gun deaths from many cities in the United States. And yet, despite the rapidly growing number of people dying because of gun violence, nothing has been done about America’s love affair with guns. In fact, many people have actually advocated for MORE guns in schools and in public communities. One year after a student at the University of Central Florida nearly killed his roommate and many other students, many people are proposing that students at the college be allowed to carry guns in their dorms. This same rule was proposed at the University of South Florida, and many members of the National Rifle Association have suggested that teachers in elementary, middle, and high schools have guns on them (Despite the teacher in New Mexico that managed to stop the shooter WITHOUT a gun). In fact, it seems that many people see past logic and call in for more guns when it was already evident that guns caused the death in the first place. Pasco County’s sheriff told Piers Morgan that without a gun, the victim in the Florida movie theater would still be dead, and that there was absolutely no need for change in Pasco County.
So, to answer the question, why do we need gun control? We need gun control because America is one of the only civilized western countries to have the gun problems we do. If you look at the statistics for the United Kingdom, America has nearly 3x the gun deaths the United Kingdom has, and more suicides than the United Kingdom. Gun control works, despite what the NRA would say. We need gun control because on the day of the Sandy Hook shooting, a man in China stabbed 22 children, and EVERYBODY survived. It is a fallacy that just as many people would die if we stopped insane people from having guns. During the decade with a federal assault weapons ban, there was only one major shooting (Columbine), while there has been a good 5-6 the past 3 years alone. You do not need to defend your home with an AK-47. You’re fighting a robber, not an army. The second amendment states that the right of a “well regulated militia” to bear arms will not be infringed. A group of insane people shooting up a movie theater and school is not a well-regulated militia. As for the “good guy with a gun” argument? The man who killed someone at the Florida movie theater was supposed to be a good guy with a gun.
Gun control doesn’t mean “We are going to take away all your guns”. It means that people who are mentally unstable are going to not have access to guns, through background checks. It means that while you can have a handgun in the house, there is absolutely no need for a federal assault weapon, unless you’re an active member of the military.
Gun control is necessary, and gun control works.
Politics with Ashley 
And yet, despite the rapidly growing number of people dying because of gun violence,
Might want to check your facts on that claim; not exactly true. For decades the trend has been decreasing number of fatalities. Also, non-fatal firearm related injuries have been decreasing.
Nor have mass shootings increased as the study “Mass Shootings in America: Moving Beyond Newtown,” by Fox and Delateur shows.
We need gun control because America is one of the only civilized western countries to have the gun problems we do.
Brazil is not a civilized country? Mexico isn’t a civilized country? Jamaica ?
And let’s address the ‘correlation is not causation’ issue; just because we have a higher fatality rate then some countries does not mean it is caused by firearms. No single element general is the cause; poverty, education, homogeneity of population/culture, drug use, single parent family (absentee fathers are a huge issue) and on and on — all contribute to the issue. Shouldn’t we be addressing those issues first?
Gun control works, despite what the NRA would say.
Care to cite any evidence of that?
The Center for Disease Control studied the issue and this is the summary for their report:
During 2000–2002, the Task Force on Community Preventive Services (the Task Force), an independent nonfederal task force, conducted a systematic review of scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of firearms laws in preventing violence, including violent crimes, suicide, and unintentional injury. The following laws were evaluated: bans on specified firearms or ammunition, restrictions on firearm acquisition, waiting periods for firearm acquisition, firearm registration and licensing of firearm owners, “shall issue” concealed weapon carry laws, child access prevention laws, zero tolerance laws for firearms in schools, and combinations of firearms laws.The Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes. (Note that insufficient evidence to determine effectiveness should not be interpreted as evidence of ineffectiveness.) This report briefly describes how the reviews were conducted, summarizes the Task Force findings, and provides information regarding needs for future research.
We need gun control because on the day of the Sandy Hook shooting, a man in China stabbed 22 children, and EVERYBODY survived.
This is an example of the logical fallacy called “Misleading Vividness” — taking one example that sticks out and using to generalize as a whole. I’ll play along and counter with
a.) The Bath Township School Massacre — 38 children at a school killed with dynamite.
b.) the Oklahoma City bombing — 19 children (nearly as many as Sandy Hook) killed by a diesel fuel and fertilizer bomb set off at the Federal Building.
Mass shootings a statistically rare event; just not that many of them happen in reality. Tragic when they do, don’t get me wrong but most of the deaths and injuries are common criminal activities. Activities the F.B.I. say are associated with drug/gang related events — 50% for homicides and 85% for violent crime.
You do not need to defend your home with an AK-47.
Who are you to tell people what they need or don’t need? Frankly the trend toward multiple assailants conducting home invasions proves you wrong in that regard. Another anecdote showing the fallacy of your statement – the L.A. Rodney King Riots. Armed Merchants in Koreatown defend their homes, their stores, their lives against what could be classified as an army — thousands of people looting and killing.
A group of insane people shooting up a movie theater and school is not a well-regulated militia.
And that is why we have laws against murder. But the right of the people — not the states, not the federal government to form a militia is at the heart of the matter. The Supreme Court, both in Heller and McDonald, confirmed the individual nature of the right to keep and bear arms.
The man who killed someone at the Florida movie theater was supposed to be a good guy with a gun.
Not only was the shooter a “good guy” he was an “Only One” (check out this video for the origin http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeGD7r6s-zU).
A retired Law Enforcement CAPTAIN. Most state laws exempt law enforcement officials from the prohibitions where they can or can not carry
But this is another case of “misleading vividness” — The National Crime Victim Survey found approximately 108,000 Defensive Gun uses (where a ‘good guy’ with a gun stopped a crime) while Kleck and Gertz found up to 2.5 MILLION.
So, yes the good guy with a gun really does stop crime.
It means that people who are mentally unstable are going to not have access to guns, through background checks.
Really? Just how does that work. The Virginia Tech shooter passed two background checks — a month apart for each. Colorado Theater shooter — passed. The Washington Navy Yard shooter; not only passed a background check to purchase his SHOTGUN — but also the Federal Background check required for his employment.
there is absolutely no need for a federal assault weapon,
That is why it is called the Bill of Rights and not the Bill of NEEDS. I use my semi-automatic rifles for enjoyment, potentially to protect myself or my family. My wife is better off using a semi-automatic rifle to defend herself than a shotgun or a pistol As a Breast Cancer survivor (muscle damage due to removal of 19 lymph nodes); her upper body strength makes using a shotgun or pistol more risky then the lower recoiling AR-15.
So please don’t tell me what I or my family needs until you know us !
The number of mass shootings has increased tremendously in the last few years alone, and gun deaths in Chicago are growing as well. Also, who are you fighting off? Unless a horde of zombies are attacking your house, nobody in this country needs an AK-47 for self defense.
Also, what evidence do I have that gun control works? England has much more gun control, and their murder rates are 1/3 the United States, and their suicide and accidental murders by guns are significantly less as well. Under Bill Clinton’s Federal Assault Weapons Ban, there was ONE historic mass-shooting (Columbine), compared to the 5-7 there has been since. Cyanide and bomb-making materials should also be regulated by the way.
England has always had a lower homicide rate than American — correlation is NOT Causation. Yet even your example has a few problems. First and foremost the system over there does not count a homicide until someone has been CONVICTED of that murder.
Since 1967, homicide figures for England and Wales have been adjusted to exclude any cases which do not result in conviction, or where the person is not prosecuted on grounds of self defence or otherwise. This reduces the apparent number of homicides by between 13 per cent and 15 per cent.
It is nearly impossible to compare country against country on a single statistic or element. Japan for example, a country you should love for all it’s gun control laws has a much higher suicide rate than America. But I would not say “Gun control causes higher suicide” — there are so many cultural, social, legal and logistical factors to point out just one.
Nor have mass shootings in America increased dramatically
In the study, “Mass Shootings in America: Moving Beyond Newtown,” Fox and coauthor Monica DeLateur, analyzed research and important statistics to debunk many common myths surrounding mass shootings—many of which were the subject of proposals from the Obama administration and Democrats in the wake of the Newtown massacre.
“Public discourse is grounded in myth and misunderstanding about the nature of the offense and those who perpetrate it,” Fox writes in the journal Homicide Studies, where the research was published. “Without minimizing the pain and suffering of the hundreds of those who have been victimized in recent attacks, the facts clearly say that there has been no increase in mass shootings and certainly no epidemic.”
Under Bill Clinton’s Federal Assault Weapons Ban, there was ONE historic mass-shooting (Columbine), compared to the 5-7 there has been since.
Thanks for pointing out an EPIC failure of gun control laws! Columbine murderers were too young to buy the firearms they wanted. So did that stop them from getting them ?
NO. they simply paid someone to do so. Again — gun control laws do not work to stop murderers. Viriginia Tech shooter waited 2 months to get 2 firearms per ‘gun control law’.
Lastly, what part of “NEED” is not in the Bill of RIGHTS are you not getting?
You don’t need a computer in order to have free speech. You don’t need a phone, cell phone either. This is the great thing about America, you don’t get to tell me what I need or not.
And while Zombies are cool to prepare for, I’m more likely to need to fight off a squad of the army than zombies. That was the reason the 2nd Amendment was written .
Oh please. The United States army could destroy any army of 2nd-amendment gun nuts if they wanted to. The reason they DON’T is because every other civilized country would get a little upset.
Also, 1 mass shooting>5-7 and in a lot of those, the shooter got a gun by legal means.
Taking away AK-47s is not a violation of the 2nd amendment. Technically, the government can only let you have a basic handgun because you still have the right to bear arms. The constitution didn’t say ALL arms.
The United States army could destroy any army of 2nd-amendment gun nuts if they wanted to
Right because the Military has demonstrated such ability in Afghanistan, Iraq, and VietNam…eh?
Why does everyone think that ‘2nd Amendment Gun nuts’ would stand up like Revolutionary war set piece battles to face the military? Ridiculous. Asymmetrical warfare would be required….how many government employees would show up for work if they were sniped at every other day? How many administrators would show up after some of their peers had been shot on the way home.
The reason they DON’T is because every other civilized country would get a little upset.
Right, like they are upset at Syria? Ukraine? Thousand other places where battles are waging? Or would they help the people fighting against the government in order to keep America pre-occupied?
Also, 1 mass shooting>5-7 and in a lot of those, the shooter got a gun by legal means.
And so what are you going to do? Make it illegal to own firearms? Great, what do you do with the 235,000,000 + rifles and shotguns in existence?
Technically, the government can only let you have a basic handgun because you still have the right to bear arms
You might want to read the Heller Decision where they said quite clearly that it is wrong to ban an entire class of firearms. Sorry but no, the government can not take away semi-automatic rifles.