Today's issue was gun control. An interesting debate. Conservatives lobby for harder punishments against criminals using guns and claim that "guns don't kill people... people kill people". Their main argument however is that guns are used for mainly for protection, sport, and are harmless inanimate objects which people manipulate for the wrong reasons. Just because people are violent and shoot each other, doesn't mean guns are the problem. On the other hand, liberals recognize that punishment for crimes involving guns has actually gotten tougher in the past several years, and that the main objective in gun control is to prevent gun crimes before they happen. If guns are less available and more difficult to obtain, the chances of them getting into the wrong hands are significantly decreased.
Being the liberal that I am, I agree completely with stricter gun laws and more gun control. While conservatives argue it infringes on their 2nd amendment rights, the fact remains that America has the highest gun-related mortality rate out of any other developed country. Too many people are injured or killed by guns to ignore the fact that harder punishment clearly isn't working, and that prevention would be much more effective. With the amount of school shootings in the past decade (Columbine, Virginia Tech, Northern Illinois...) and the amount of other gun related massacres (sniper shootings), punishment after-the-fact will do NOTHING to stop shootings from happening. Punishing the criminal won't give any victims their lives back. The entire "people kill people" argument just seems hilarious. If people kill people, then why would anyone want to provide them with guns?
No comments:
Post a Comment