VS. Augmented background checks will bring security


by Dennis Duffy
Eagle Staff

With the recent shootings in Newtown, Conn. and Taft, Calif., the topic of gun control and violation has been on the minds of many Americans. These horrific events have brought about the want for change in our society. These changes would protect Americans and strengthen America.

NRA and gun-wielding Americans think limiting, regulating and controlling the distribution of firearms will weaken the American people, when in fact it will do the opposite.

While the availability of guns is generally not a bad concept, limiting these guns to men and women we can trust will make our country much more safe. With stricter regulation and limitations on firearms, Americans will find comfort in the fact that guns are in the hands of responsible Americans.

Having the opportunity for all Americans to own firearms is a good idea in theory but it is not applicable in the real world.

The proper course that our government should take is that of regulation, limitation and controlling of firearms.

Allowing people such as Adam Lanza, the Newtown shooter, or Seung-Hui Cho, the Virginia Tech massacre shooter, access to assault rifles and other firearms is a grave mistake. Our government is trying to find ways to get rid of this problem.

One of the most supported methods is  a universal background check. This method would be required for all firearm transactions, even private ones such as at a gun show.

This universal background check would search through a federal database for anybody that is not able to purchase a firearm.

In light of recent situations, the criteria that the government should now inforce more than ever is not allowing people with mental disabilites or mental illness to possess firearms. Our government must make this happen, because if not there might be another shooting just like in Newtown.

Many Americans are angered by the fact that the governments wants to limit the guns that civilians can posses.

If these limitations were in place, people such as Lanza, would not have access to semi-automatic weapons.

There is no need for any person other than a soldier to carry an automatic or semi-automatic assault rifle.

Another problem arises when thinking of the shootings: security.

Our campus, which is very easy to enter, is not well-protected and could be susceptible to attack. Rather than concerning ourselves with our Second Amendment right, which was written when muskets were king, our society should worry about security precautions to handle potential shootings and attacks.

Our government is concerned with protecting us, which entails preventing shooting.

We must concern ourselves with controlling guns to remedy the issues that are plaguing us today. Fighting fire with fire will not solve anything.