Guns Don’t Kill People, but They Surely Help Them

Guns Don’t Kill People, but They Surely Help Them

Recently, there has been massive political unrest in the United States over the incident of the Orlando shooting. Over fifty people have died and the motive of the crime is still being investigated. Now, what need or problem does the incident suggest in the status quo?

Gun laws surrounding firearm possession are ineffective and insufficient. Various organizations, such as the National Rifle Authority (NRA), even go against it, saying that the 2^nd amendment which is “the right to bear arms” shall be prevalent. Even a great number of the public agree with these organizations for they, too possess a firearm, and the “gun culture” of a “true American” has been instilled in them like the blood flowing through their veins.

What evidence does the incident provide to support this claim? Well first of all, how did a man walk into a bar on an open street with an assault rifle? In addition, this is no ordinary assault rifle. The infamous Avtomat Kalashnikov 47 brags a 7.62 armor-piercing round which is powerful enough to penetrate walls, vehicles, and military-grade Kevlar. Having mentioned this, we now go to the roots of this particular case. How was the shooter able to purchase such a powerful and lethal weapon, and where? Was he able to pass all the tests and screenings for him to be qualified to possess the weapon, or did he just purchase it from the black market? Many questions and mysteries branch out from this single event, yet it all points towards the government’s incapability to control and monitor its own implementations.

What plan or course of action do I recommend? Well here comes the long and boring part. This is the part where I explain by detail what I think should be done or implemented to avoid such tragic incidents from happening again.

It is statistically stated that states that have more gun ownerships are the ones that have the most gun-related crimes, go figure. It also true that the United States is a country that even encourages its people to possess firearms. I think that gun laws should be narrowed down and specified to be more effective, more convenient for the authorities to monitor, and safer for the people of the state. I would wish for the US Amendment be reformed to mirror gun laws here in the Philippines. Level 1 weapons (pistols, handguns, sidearms) and level 2 weapons (shotguns, bolt-action hunting rifles) are the only weapon types a civilian is allowed to possess. Level 3 weapons (submachineguns) and level 4 weapons (assault rifles) are the weapon types that only military personnel are allowed to have for personal possession. Level 5 weapons or the exotic types (RPGs, LAWs, machineguns, etc) are weapon types that only a government military entity is allowed to possess for official use. What does this solve? It still provides personal safety and home defense (assuming that’s what everybody with a firearm has in mind) without the capability to overpower. I was going to say kill, but even without a gun, any human being has the power to kill another. Overpower here means that without strong firepower, a single shooter doesn’t have the capability to overpower the police and/or start a mass shootout.

If you’re an American, you would say, “you’re violating my rights!” But now I tell you, “How many of you are violating others’?” If the entire purpose of possessing a firearm as you say is for personal or home defense, then there shouldn’t be a problem since you’d be shooting a man or two, not Tupac (hope you get the reference), and a couple of bullets is enough. Now if you say that this is your defense when America gets invaded or attacked (which is the original purpose stated in the amendment), believe me, that isn’t going to happen. I mean really? Really, invasion, America, you’re threatened? Really? “Terrorists” have more right to both bear firearms and to say this statement since it’s America invading them. At the end of the day, this sends a message to the people that their rights to firearm possession for self and home defense are not violated, but rather limited to a point where they are not allowed to possess firepower that goes beyond that primary purpose.