Gun control is a topic that has been heavily debated since the 1800s and remains controversial to this day. Opinions on gun control are mixed. On one side, people make the argument that gun control is positive, since it regulates gun ownership. On the other hand, people make the argument that gun control isn’t effective and does nothing to address the accessibility issue.
Recently, the topic has resurfaced with Trump allowing new rapid fire gun modifications from the passing of famous politician and activist Charlie Kirk. But this brings up a question: what do the students think of gun control? George Ruiz, a junior, Sebastian Nepomuceno, a junior, and Daniel Zarate, a sophomore, had some strong points on gun control.
Zarate believes gun control is flawed. He believes that most crimes involve guns and that many people are scared of guns instead of seeing them as a form of self-defense. This shows that Zarate negatively views guns and believes other people do too. His negative perspective on guns shows he believes the government isn’t doing enough to prevent gun violence; hence, gun control is ineffective. Some suggestions Zarate gave to improve gun control were to perform deeper background checks to truly understand the intent of the buyer, as well as to enhance and make more laws to strengthen gun control.
While Zaratel’s views on gun control were negative, Ruiz had a different perspective. Ruiz was neutral on gun control. On one side, he argued that gun control does give us laws and permits to own guns legally; however, some people still manage to bypass this by selling guns illegally. “Gun control is important and is needed to protect families or yourself,” Ruiz said. He said when he was five years old, his dad was able to defend his house from an intruder, which shaped how he thinks of control. However, he has seen his fair share of negative stories on the news, like mass shootings and gang violence. Ruiz seemed to favor neither side.
Nepomuceno had a similar perspective to Zarate’s. Nepomuceno shared the opinion that guns never lead to positive outcomes; they always lead to horrible acts. He stated that it is not fair for lives to be taken just because the government can’t do enough to protect their residents. Some solutions Nepomuceno gave were to make stricter laws and standards.
Gun control is not effective at all. Because rarely, there is something positive in the news in regard to the usage of guns. There are mostly negative stories like mass shootings, gang violence, robberies, and police standoffs; it’s never something positive like a self-defense story. Another reason why gun control laws are flawed is due to the fact that anyone can own guns; they are way too accessible. The requirements should be way stricter, and the government could do this in a plethora of ways.
To start off, the government should require mental health checks from the buyer. This could help to see if the buyer plans to do anything wrong with the gun, and it could check for any signs of mental health disorders. Another step that should be included is that the buyer must not have a previous problem with substance abuse. This is because drugs heavily impair the overall mental state of someone who abuses them and can cause an outcome that the person could regret. In fact, an article by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health states that “an estimated 1 in 3 gun homicide perpetrators drank heavily before murdering their victim.” Drinking and homicide are correlated to one another, which is why it should be kept in mind when doing a background check.
Overall, the students seemed to have a different range of opinions on gun control. Like Zarate, Nepomuceno and I focused on the negative outcomes of poor gun control and supported stricter laws; Ruiz seemed to notice both the risks and benefits. Gun control will continue to spark debates all around the world; the only thing that can be done is to continue to speak on this matter and hope they get heard.
