In Elizabeth Linton’s blog, she addresses gun laws and brings
up the latest Colorado shooting. She points out that the shooter made several
large purchases of weapons and did not raise any suspicion. This fact is
alarming and dangerous as many people are now even more aware of the ease in
which a person can attain weapons and walk into anywhere they please. The two are
probably unrelated, but there is a possibility that the recent Sikh shooting
may have been inspired by the Colorado shooting as it was made public how
little effort a person has to exert in order to carry out a small whim that otherwise
may have turned into brain-crack.
Linton questions whether or not it violates our 2nd
amendment right to bear arms if we limit the amount of weapons people can
purchase, and also monitor purchases to pick up and investigate potential
crimes or suspects. While doing both of these would decrease the amount of
shooting deaths each year, I think that monitoring the purchasing activity of
people would be a violation of privacy and infringe upon the 2nd
amendment. Instead, I think it should be limited.
Limiting the amount of bullets people can purchase would decrease
the number of deaths because typically, these deaths are an impulse by the
shooter. By limiting the amount of ammunition or weapons the shooter can
purchase, we force the shooter to take more time to compose, second-guess, or
decide not to go through with his/her plan of attack. This would ultimately
lead to fewer shootings as people begin to come to their senses. We would have
fewer impulsive killings, which make up a large percentage of the gun related
killings. One way of limiting weapon purchases is through the Rational Gun Policy,
which would ban firearms and ammunition clips that hold more than 10 rounds. On
the night of the Colorado movie shooting, Holmes shot 70 people within minutes
with a gun that contained 100 rounds. While this policy may not bode well with
gun enthusiasts, it could greatly decrease the number of deaths involved in
mass shootings.
For those who want to stockpile weapons for their
protection, they will still be able to do so, but at a steadier, slower rate.
People will still be able to hold the same amount of weapons but will not be
able to buy them all at once. Of course, this approach to the problem still leaves
room for mass shootings, but I think it will significantly decrease the number.
It was reported in Linton’s blog that Holmes bought an alarming amount of
weapons which he got quickly delivered to him on the same day of the shooting.
If we were to limit the amount people can purchase, perhaps there would be
fewer victims or none at all.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/23/opinion/webster-aurora-shooter/index.html
http://pearlyabraham.tripod.com/htmls/myth-guns1.html
