OPINION: Simply hoping for better gun control won’t keep you safe
Vu Chau - The State Hornet
October 25, 2017
(Go to StateHornet.com/Guns for more related stories)
The issue of gun control in the United States remains a subject of heated debate among politicians and citizens alike, as mass shootings have become increasingly frequent over the past ten years.
The tragic shooting in Las Vegas earlier this month that left 59 people dead and over 500 injured has once again raised arguments for and against tighter gun control across the country.
Related: Shooting on campuses are on the rise — Is Sacramento State prepared?
The extreme polarization over this issue is apparent, and if the past decade has taught us anything, it is that no real consensus over gun control is likely to be reached, as long as those on both sides of the argument remain so far apart, regardless of how gruesome the circumstances.
For many, the right to bear arms is not just an amendment to our constitution but an integral part of American culture that must be preserved and protected like free speech or rights to life, liberty, and property.
However, as mass shootings in the U.S. continue to become a more frequent and devastating reality with no real solution in sight, the question remains: How do we put an end to this horrifying trend?
The truth is, there are no quick, easy solutions. Our debates on mental illness and vying for tighter gun control offer a chance to explore new solutions, but don’t offer the safety and protection we need right now.
The public spaces and events we occupy are no longer places where we can afford to be unaware or unprepared. Whether it is a movie theatre, a crowded concert or a college campus, all of us, as individuals, must be mindful of our surroundings and take precautions to ensure our own safety, as well as the safety of those around us, even without the use of firearms.
Related: #SacStateSays: How do you feel about guns?
Such precautions include simply knowing the locations of emergency exits when attending public events where you and others are vulnerable to such attacks. Have a plan in place and know how to get yourself to safety.
Also, when attending public events, especially concerts or raves, it is important to monitor your own alcohol or substance consumption. Serious impairment will reduce your ability to think clearly and make the quick decisions necessary to protect yourself in a crisis situation.
Lastly, remember that technology can save you in these terrifying situations. Make sure your devices are charged so friends and family can communicate with you and track your location while attending such events. Take advantage of functions on your smart device such as “shared location,” which is available on iPhones. Also, use apps such as SafeTrek-Personal Safety, which quickly alerts local emergency responders at the press of a button. These tools are available at our fingertips and should be used.
As the battle over gun control in this country continues, and mass shootings solidify themselves as a constant part of American life, it is crucial that we as citizens take charge of our own personal safety. We must prepare ourselves and those we care about for the worse-case scenario.
Too many innocent lives have been lost, and we can no longer afford to bicker and argue over how the government should or shouldn’t handle gun control. It is up to us, the people, to find ways in which we can ensure our own safety and hopefully put an end to this new American tradition together.
Gene Ralno • Oct 25, 2017 at 1:59 pm
Here’s another side of this debate. Perhaps this isn’t about public safety at all. Citing rare catastrophic events, e.g., Orlando and Las Vegas, then falsely representing them as common has become a well-rehearsed leftist drill. Every time they hear a gunshot, they begin howling that a hundred million peaceable, lawful citizens who weren’t there should be punished with more regulation – regulation that would never stop the incident that triggered the howl. The uninformed believe it but most are fed up with this nonsense. For example, since 1950, only one percent of the mass shootings have occurred where citizens are allowed to defend themselves. Instead of blaming an instrument, it makes more sense to blame cold-blooded sociopaths and perhaps, leftists who nurture and rouse them. Rational leaders would punish those who end human life without remorse instead of those who weren’t there. Mass shootings are not rising. The U.S. is one of the safest nations on the earth. The differences between the murder rates in the U.S. and other civilized western nations are measured in the thousandths of a percent. Disarming citizens won’t make us safer and likely would open the door for a spike in crime rates.
The point is a Congressional Research Service study entitled “Mass Murder with Firearms…1999-2013,” found that mass shootings continue to be rare and the annual incidence is flat. Additionally, criminologist James Alan Fox found no solid trend in the numbers. Fact is, mass shootings account for only .004 percent of all deaths, about .66 percent of all murders and less than two percent of non-firearm murder victims. James Alan Fox clarified the data by pointing out the chance against a person being killed in a mass shooting would be about one in three million. Further, the CDC found that homicides by firearm have dropped by nearly half proportional to the population over the past two decades. During that time, sales of firearms tripled and ownership today is skyrocketing. Even if they cannot accept facts, it’s disgraceful that leftists believe disarming potential victims is rational.
What’s missing from leftists is the data necessary to convince us that these laws will be effective. Instead of blindly accepting what leftists feed us, we need to start dealing with the real problem — not gun murders — just murders. Gun homicides are just part of the total reported murders per 100,000 population. In 1993 the number was seven. That number was reduced to 3.8 per 100,000 by 2013. Of 218 nations measured, the U.S. now ranks 98th, about in the middle. Stated another way, your chances of being murdered in the U.S. are 38 thousandths of a percent (.000038). In the U.K., your chances are .8 thousandths of a percent (.000008). That’s a difference of 30 thousandths of a percent, a very small number any way you look at it. Leftists often say your chances of being murdered in the U.S. are almost five times as great as in the U.K. But five times almost nothing is still almost nothing. By the way, over the last 20 years, crime among African-American youth has fallen by 47 percent. That should surprise no one because the vast majority of Americans live in open carry states where all categories of crime are at record lows. In other words this is a non-issue.
When considering nations with lower murder rates, one also must consider the large number of murders by illegal aliens, a major factor in the U.S. and in no other place on earth. Factoring out the GAO’s latest estimate of 5,639 annual murders by illegal aliens, the U.S. murders per 100,000 would be reduced to 2.1. That number would place the U.S. well within the safest one-third of the world. Someone should tell the leftists that tinkering with a system that works may make matters worse.
As a postscript, the laws are strong enough. Every criminal who commits a crime with a firearm could be charged with acquisition (10 years), possession (10 years) and commission (10 years). That’s 30 years that cannot be served concurrently. They must be served consecutively and they must be added to a sentence for the crime itself. Fact is these career politicians don’t have the guts to insist that local judicial authority sentence armed cretins to additional 30 year terms. It’s too draconian, too unusual, too cruel, too… Fact is they haven’t the guts to ask taxpayers to build more prisons and actually take criminals off the streets. Why? They might not believe long prison terms will serve as deterrents to crime. On the other hand, they might believe disarming a hundred million peaceable, lawful citizens will deter crime. Or perhaps it’s not about public safety at all.