Every time there is any kind of mass shooting, the debate over gun control is revived. Some want to ban citizens from owning guns entirely. Others only want to find a way to prevent unstable people from acquiring guns. The argument seems to go: if criminals and unstable people did not have guns, they would not be able to kill people, or at least not kill as many people. But, is that true? And, if it is true, is making guns illegal, or much more difficult to acquire, the best solution?
Undeniably, guns are very convenient weapons for someone who is seeking to kill people. However, there are suicide bombs, planted bombs, knife attacks, acid attacks, etc., that demonstrate there are other choices, just as concealable, and even more deadly. If a psychotic individual wants to kill people, he/she can find a way, with or without a gun. Since the very beginning of humanity, people have been killing other people (see Genesis 4). Taking guns out of the equation would not, ultimately, solve the problem.
As politicians and anti-gun rights activists continuously chant, “we don’t want to take your guns,” behind the scenes — in just months — politicians have been working overtime to limit and remove your right to bear arms. These laws all started as a reaction to the tragic shooting in Parkland, Florida last year and with every shooting since, they have sped up. And, like most politicians always do, they are not letting these tragedies go to waste. The
The remainder of this article is available in its entirety at HNewsWire