In the aftermath of each mass shooting, the nation finds itself divided into three primary camps of thought: 1) “Guns don’t kill people; people kill people”—a sentiment closely tied to the belief that stricter gun laws would only disarm law-abiding citizens; 2) “We urgently require sensible gun regulations to curb these horrific events”; and 3) those who staunchly insist on not politicizing these tragedies.
Let’s dissect why two of these arguments hold little weight.
The first two perspectives often intertwine. When 59 lives are lost in a single act of violence, with over 500 additional individuals injured, it becomes painfully evident that our gun laws are inadequate. In Las Vegas, for instance, it’s completely legal to carry a machine gun. As the dust settles, many rightly call for legislative changes to mitigate future occurrences. Yet, this call is met with claims that guns are mere “tools” and that if someone wishes to commit violence, they could simply use a hammer, knife, or even a car. This line of reasoning echoes the NRA’s narrative that suggests widespread gun ownership is necessary to fend off bad actors.
However, the flaw in this logic is glaring: a shooter from the 32nd floor of a hotel could not inflict the same level of carnage by tossing hammers or knives from his window. While some individuals might perish, the numbers would be drastically lower. The same applies to cars; while they can indeed be weaponized, they come with regulations such as registration and insurance. We don’t abandon these regulations simply because some might choose to ignore them.
Consider the restrictions on purchasing Sudafed—these do not eliminate meth use but significantly reduce it. Similarly, laws mandating seat belt use and drunk driving regulations have demonstrably decreased fatalities. Owning locks on our doors doesn’t prevent all break-ins, yet we still invest in them for safety. It’s perplexing that in the context of gun violence, the inability to completely eradicate the issue serves as a rationale for inaction.
The narrative of “now is not the time to discuss this” has emerged as a new barrier to progress. But when, exactly, would be a more appropriate moment? Emotions run high following these tragedies; families are shattered. Yes, I am politicizing this issue, and rightly so. Politics is, at its core, about addressing and solving societal problems. If a dam collapses, discussions about building codes follow immediately. We must apply that same urgency to our nation’s gun crisis.
The harsh reality is that America is grappling with a significant gun violence problem. We need to confront this issue head-on—immediately. It cannot wait for the blood to dry or the headlines to shift. The national narrative is fleeting, with our collective memory often overshadowed by the next sensational story. Just days ago, a shocking event took place, one that was quickly overshadowed by another news cycle. If we don’t act now, we risk forgetting once again, just as we have after tragedies like Newtown, Charleston, and Orlando.
Now is the time for meaningful discussions around effective gun regulations. This isn’t disrespectful to the victims; rather, failing to address the issue would be the true disservice. America doesn’t need more thoughts and prayers; it needs decisive action—NOW. For additional insights into related topics, check out this excellent resource on treating infertility or explore our informative piece on home insemination options at Modern Family Blog.
Summary:
America faces an urgent gun violence crisis that demands immediate action and sensible regulations. Debates surrounding gun control must happen now, not later, to honor the victims and work toward solutions that can prevent future tragedies.