Gun Control, As Told By A Liberal Brit | The Odyssey Online
Start writing a post
Politics and Activism

Gun Control, As Told By A Liberal Brit

We're all lacking basic knowledge and common sense in this arena

2
Gun Control, As Told By A Liberal Brit
Twitter

I know next to nothing about guns. I can tell you the difference between automatic and semi-automatic, and I know that AK-47s and AR-15s are big and scary, but not technically “assault rifles.” Other than that, my knowledge is extremely limited.

What’s important, though, is that I know how little I know about guns. So, instead of giving a detailed proposal outlining how I, a freshman political science major, am going to solve the problem that has plagued America for decades, I’m going to offer some thoughts that are probably on many of our minds.

We are lacking experts on guns when it comes to gun control. Don’t get me wrong -- I’m all for increased restrictions, and possibly an assault weapons ban. But if we do take such measures, it is absolutely imperative that people who are versed in the complexities of guns have significant input on legislation, to make sure it is actually effective. Blanket-banning assault weapons is not going to work, insofar as we allow copycat loopholes or accessories that give non-banned guns the same capacity as the banned ones.

As well as a dearth of experts, we’re also lacking basic common sense when it comes to gun control. The political right loves to tout common sense as a justification for everything from bathroom lawsto energy legislation.Even though I lack the technical knowledge of guns, I can still provide a perception of the issue that invokes common sense as validation.

In the aftermath of the Orlando tragedy, I’m glad that, even a few weeks later, the conversation has not completely dissipated. However, I’m disappointed to see that both sides of the political spectrum are still playing games to demonize the other side, instead of actually confronting the real problem.

There are some important issues that absolutely do need to be addressed. As a liberal, I am for increased restrictions and an assault weapons ban. However, there are still some issues that the left does not necessarily address adequately. One of these is the general purpose of guns in society.

The right often touts guns as a savior, manifesting as the perfect weapon of self-defense. I’ll give it to them: I’m sure a gun can incapacitate a perpetrator better than fighting them off with your bare hands. This is assuming that the armed civilian is able to shoot it in time and aim correctly. There are a lot of factors that come into play with self-defense but, sure, let’s assume for a minute it works and is a viable solution.

Unfortunately, this is not a compelling enough reason to abandon all other measures to restrict gun access. You can agree or disagree with my stance, but I can promise you I will never own a gun, let alone walk down the street with a concealed weapon. That is an unalterable fact. Yet, legislators are quick to introduce gun rightspolicies, without giving a second thought to their constituents. Thus, I have to ask myself: When are legislators going to start caring about me? What plans do they have to make sure I can walk down the street, or into a movie theater, or a school without getting shot? I’m never going to carry a gun, so if your only solution is “guns for self-defense,” you’re leaving me out of the picture and out to dry. That is unacceptable.

And if you tell me it’s my own damn fault for not owning a gun, and I ought to invest in one, maybe we need to have a chat about “liberty.” Because forcing a gun onto me -- whether it be by mandate or by implicit force -- is quintessential big government.

Moreover, we see the emergence of gun owners, providing reasons not to seize their guns, and explaining that they are responsible enough to use them nonviolently. The left is quick to retort that there is “no viable reason to ever own a military-style assault weapon.” Both sides provide valid arguments; however, this is not the debate we need to be having.

The discourse that ought to occur following a shooting -- or just in general, to prevent more bad things from happening in the future -- should not revolve around whether guns have uses, but rather how we evaluate these uses in the context of their capacity for terror. AK-47s or AR-15s might be helpful for self-defense; however, are you really going to be carrying one in a movie theater, or school, or nightclub? Will it be there for you when you need it most? An AR-15's adaptability for hunting and other purposes makes it a convenient weapon to own; does that trump the fact it’s a convenient weapon to kill scores of people with, as well? It’s our right as the people to bear arms of some sort, but how does that coexist with our right to public safety?

How do we weigh the functionality of household weapons against their potential and manifest potency? These are the questions we need to be asking.

And, yes, it’s frustrating that responsible gun owners may be punished for the acts of mass shooters. Unfortunately, that’s how our society works. Sure, some people might be able to drink responsibly under 21, or smoke some pot, or go over the speed limit safely. However, because these actions carry inherent risk, we have made them illegal. At this point in time, I see no reason why any person’s right to own a gun ought to take precedence over another’s right to live.

Unfortunately, this issue that is definitely very much about guns has been constantly manipulated to make it about anything but the weapon that has been far too frequently employed to murder people.

When it comes to mass shootings, there usually is a lot more at play than a guy who grabs a gun and wreaks havoc. The media loves to explore the motives and identity of the perpetrator, and characterize them as a terrorist, or misunderstood, or mentally unstable, or what have you.

It’s important to understand the underlying factors that coalesce and erupt in a mass shooting. Yet we cannot continue to use them as a scapegoat and ignore the issue of guns. We seem stuck in these false dichotomies: is the Orlando shooting an issue of terrorism or gun control? Was Sandy Hook about mental health or gun control?

Why can’t it be both? Weapons control and radicalization are intertwined issues; just as we don’t want Iran to obtain nuclear weapons, so too would it be nice to prevent ISIS sympathizers from buying AR-15s. If we really wanted to be “tough and vigilant” on ISIS, we would support legislation to ensure they cannot access high-powered weapons.

No matter how radicalized Omar Mateen was, if he wasn’t able to get his hands on a weapon, he would have not been able to carry out the attacks. I know it’s easy to say that even if he didn’t obtain an AR-15, he would have been able to bring a handgun, or a knife, or another weapon into a club. That may be true, and we do have to take steps to eradicate domestic radicalization. However, reality suggests that Mateen would have been able to inflict significantly less damage with a knife, than a semi-automatic weapon. We cannot have suspected terrorists picking up AR-15s. It’s just unacceptable.

At the same time, it’s disappointing to see the left mobilizing over bills that seek to increase the salience of racial profiling and combating “radical Islamism” more so than they have in the past to address other mass shootings with a white perpetrator. Yes, I agree with legislation to reduce the terrorist threat. However, a white guy with a gun is just as dangerous -- and overwhelmingly more common in mass shootings -- than a Middle Eastern (or an American with Middle Eastern heritage), and our gun control efforts should focus on the common denominator of guns rather than singling out specific perpetrators. Again: common sense.

The issue of gun control is admittedly complex, and will require compromise from both the left and the right. However, that is is difficult does not mean it is impossible. I can only hope to see progress in the coming months.

Report this Content
This article has not been reviewed by Odyssey HQ and solely reflects the ideas and opinions of the creator.
university
University of Nebraska at Omaha

Creating your schedule for the upcoming semester can be an exciting process. You have the control to decide if you want to have class two-days a week or five-days a week. You get to check things off of your requirement checklist. It's an opportunity for a fresh start with new classes (which you tell yourself you'll never skip.) This process, which always starts out so optimistic, can get frustrating really quickly. Here are 25 thoughts you have when registering for classes.

Keep Reading...Show less
Student Life

10 Thoughts Of A 5th Year Senior

What about those of us who don't do it all in four years?

983
college shirt
pointsincase.com

"College will be the best four years of your life" is a phrase that we have all heard growing up. College is painted as a magical place to us while we are in high school. A place you go to learn, meet your best friends and probably have the time of your life while all of this is going down. Four whirlwind years, where everything that you've known changes and you start to learn what it means to live on your own, have a job, etc. But what about those of us who don't do this all in four years? Major changes, hard courses, switching schools, career paths changing, these are just a handful of factors that could extend your four years to five, six or seven. There is nothing wrong with taking extra time to graduate, but returning as a fifth-year is a little different. Most of your best friends have most likely graduated and moved and while you may be one of the oldest undergraduates on campus, you might feel as awkward as a freshmen. A world that became home and comfortable to you is still there but it's slightly different than you've known it to be and you have to find a groove to fall into. These are thoughts you'll have as you look ahead to returning to your college campus, with a victory lap planned.

Keep Reading...Show less
Entertainment

17 Times "Friends" Accurately Described Life

You can't say that no one told you life was gonna be this way.

190
friends

In the 12 years since it went off the air, "Friends" continues to be adored by millions. The show that gave generations unrealistic expectations about love (or should I say lobsters?) and New York City apartments had a charming cast of characters that everyone could relate to at some point or another. Here are 17 times Ross, Monica, Joey, Chandler, Phoebe and Rachel accurately described life.

Keep Reading...Show less
Entertainment

11 Times Aubrey Plaza Described Sophomore Year

"I don't want to do things. I want to do not things."

549
Aubrey Plaza
Flickr Creative Commons

Aubrey Plaza is one of my favorite humans in Hollywood. She's honest, blunt, unapologetic, and hilarious. I just started my sophomore year of college, and found that some of her best moments can accurately describe the start of the school year.

1. When your advisor tells you that you should declare a major soon.

2. Seeing the lost and confused freshmen and remembering that was you a short year ago, and now being grateful you know the ins and outs of the campus.

3. Going to the involvement fair to sign up for more clubs knowing that you are already too involved.

4. When you actually do the reading required for the first class.

5. Seeing your friends for the first time since last semester.

6. When you're already drowning in homework during syllabus week.

7. Realizing you don't have the same excitement for classes as you did as a freshman.

8. Going home and seeing people from high school gets weirder the older you get.

Keep Reading...Show less
Student Life

College vs. High School

Freedom vs. Curfew

278
graduation

Things you may not realize are different between high school and college:

Keep Reading...Show less

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Facebook Comments