by Cooper Lewis – Photographer
Gun control and whether we should have it or not has been an issue for a long time now. Guns, as everybody knows by now, are dangerous weapons and have been a part of many deaths and injuries in the U.S. and around the world.
Places like Australia have completely banned guns from citizen use after a mass shooting. In 1996, a 28-year-old man named Martin Bryant started the deadliest mass shooting in Australia. Bryant was caught the next day, but by then 35 people had been killed, 23 left wounded.
People make the argument that since then there has been little to no crime in Australia since, and because of the lack of violence the U.S. should ban guns. While gun control should definitely exist and the purchasing and trading of guns should be looked at and kept strict, guns should not be completely banned.
Guns are the most popular weapons used for murder among both men and women, but it is not really the gun that kills. It is the person. If a person really wanted to kill someone, they would. Whether guns are banned or not, that person has the intent to kill. They will find a way to get what they want. Poisons, knives, even a person’s brute strength as well, are all different forms that one could easily use to kill someone. By taking the publics rights to guns away, it is just putting them in danger. Sure, there are other weapons that could help them defend themselves, but just like guns are the most efficient for murder, they are also the most efficient for protection.
On top of that, even after guns are banned, criminals can still get ahold of them, the same way people still get ahold of drugs and the same way teenagers get ahold of alcohol. There is never a completely sufficient way to get rid of something and guns are no exceptions.
So in the end, guns are just an object. It would be a waste of the government’s and people’s time to completely ban guns. Instead, gun control should be kept strict so less people with bad intentions can get ahold of them.