As our country faced yet another mass shooting again last week, we have the "now is not the time to talk about gun control" narrative thrown in our faces again. Clearly, if the parents and families of survivors who are still grieving and haven't even made it past the first week of this tragedy are saying it's the time, then it is the time.
When I sat down to write this, I didn't know whether I should call it a mass shooting or school shooting, since that's sometimes how we differentiate between those that happen in a school and those that don't. That's a problem. That highlights the unsettling amount of times this has happened.
This isn't a "liberal" or "right-wing" problem anymore, and it shouldn't be.
Gun control should be something that's logical and backed by anyone, that is of course, unless you plan on misusing a gun.
There's a difference between gun-control and "taking away guns." Plain and simple. This isn't about taking away guns altogether, so stop trying to undermine gun control activists by diverting to a whole other argument entirely.
And the "drugs are illegal" narrative is getting old too. Those are incomparable problems, and it's the easiest, lowest argument you can make.
In the most recent tragedy, the gunman purchased his weapons legally. Period. He shouldn't have been able to purchase them. So if you want to make the argument that he would've gotten his hands on it, either way, it's faulty in this case because that's not what happened, and in many cases, that's not what happened.
He legally purchased an AR-15, under 20 years old. He's wasn't even legally old enough to drink yet, but he legally purchased an AR-15, not a little handgun, which you also must be 21 to purchase under federal law.
You should be asking yourself, "why is that?"
It should disturb you, and if it doesn't, you need to rethink the system.
Numerous peers and survivors said it was no surprise when they found out it was Cruz who committed the brutal murders. There were multiple clues point to unstable mental health. If we want to make this about mental health instead of guns, fine, but explain then why a bill that would've made those with mental illness required to have a background check before purchasing a gun, was just recently revoked by the current administration.
Posts on his social media accounts were extremely alarming. Comments made on gun-related videos made under a username that uses the gun man's name were extremely alarming. And those were reported, and he still was able to legally purchase his weapons.
His social media should've been checked. He should've gone through a background check and a mental health examination. He should've been prevented from making the purchase, but he wasn't because it's too easy to buy a gun. It could've bought time, or even allowed the FBI a second chance to re-examine concerns brought to their attention.
Why should we not want to look into people more who are buying firearms capable of such destruction? Why shouldn't we want to make it a little harder? It shouldn't affect lawful gun owners anyway, unless they're criminals or have bad intentions.
If we don't have real gun control soon, then at this point, what do we have? The FBI failed these victims by not looking into previously reported threats as thoroughly as they should've. The current administration revoked a mental illness background check bill.
Other arguments haven't worked in the past, and clearly still aren't working now. Why don't we stop with the "ifs, ands, and buts," and simply try. It works elsewhere.