Yes

By: Steven Wild

I’m going to be very honest; I was initially hesitant to accept the offer to write this editorial.  For those readers who are unaware, this is my second guest writing for the Warrior Beat – the first was an op-ed advocating gay rights.  Alas, I have managed to overcome the fear of serving as a proponent for the second half of likely the most unpopular pair of political views in south Mississippi, as I presume that literally no other student would willingly put him or herself in this position; Warrior Beat staffers, feel free to thank me later (that is, if the NRA does not get to me first).  Before you all leap up and proceed to cleaning and loading your shotguns in disdain for my “anti-gun” position, let me say that, believe it or not, I do not intend for the federal government to invade the homes of the American people, crack their safes, and rid their living quarters of all weaponry. I simply believe that, if more closely examined, certain limited measures of gun and ammunition control could play a vital role in keeping our country safe from the dangers of gun violence, while still allowing certain gun owners to exercise their right to bear arms.
For starters, policy makers should implement common-sense measures of weapon restriction. Among other things, leaders should develop more effective gun registration systems, implement tougher purchasing requirements, prohibit bulk weaponry sales, and ban assault-style weapons and ammunition distribution. By taking such breathtakingly obvious, yet simplistic steps, public officials can achieve the best of both worlds, preserving both constitutional liberties and the general welfare of the people.
The effects of lenient gun policy are far too often overshadowed by the fervor of radical gun rights lobbyists and politicians.  Unfortunately, these activists conceal an important message. There are approximately 283 million guns in American civilian hands. Each of these weapons is 22 times more likely to be used in a completed or attempted suicide, criminal assault or homicide, or unintentional shooting death or injury than to be used in a self-defense shooting.  It is no secret, then, that, in the United States, 100,000 people will be killed or seriously injured as a result of gun violence… in 2011 alone.  Rather than cling to the mantra of unequivocal gun rights, government leaders should, thus, take simple, obvious steps to keep guns out of the hands of those who will use them for all of the wrong reasons, and, in doing so, preserve the common safety of all Americans.

NO

By:

“I want an Official Red Ryder Carbine-Action Two-Hundred-Shot Range Model Air Rifle!” young protagonist Ralphie tells a jolly department store Santa Claus in the 1983 film A Christmas Story. Kris Kringle chuckles, gives the child a firm stare, and says “You’ll shoot your eye out, kid.” Though most law-abiding firearms owners (hopefully) don’t send letters to Santa, the growing tension surrounding the Second Amendment has caused all of the Red Ryder fans to wish for their Constitutional rights. Because we as Americans should not have to appeal to Congress, much like children who sit on Santa’s lap, and ask for an effective means of self defense, I propose that the Second Amendment be upheld. For those of us who do not carry a pocket-sized Constitution in our American flag motif wallets, the Second Amendment states, “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” While militias and private gun ownership are different terms of firearm jargon, they are both addressed and granted to Americans in the Second Amendment. While I fully support the peoples’ right to defend themselves from the government and harmful individuals, I also believe a hybrid approach would be more effective in hindering crime. Those with criminal records should be monitored more carefully as far as weapons go, and firearms dealers should be highly penalized for knowledgeably selling guns to former or current criminals. Denying self-defense to law-abiding citizens because of the danger imposed by law-breaking ones is an ineffective policy that puts innocent civilians in jeopardy. The Brady Campaign to prevent gun violence employs the slogans, “No background check, no gun, no excuses,” and “Sensible gun laws save lives.”  The movement seeks to close the gun show loophole and provide safety for all citizens through the cautious and reliable sale of firearms for self defense. May we all wish for this type of well-being: the peace of mind that criminals will not acquire firearms and the ability as civil, sensible people to protect ourselves with them. Congress should not be able to dismiss us with an assumption that we may self-destruct if we are given the freedom to own guns. Instead, we should defend our rights with sensibility. In the words of Niccolo Machiavelli, one of the world’s best-known political theorists, “Above all else, be armed.” Equipped with the right words and weapons, we have the ability to protect the Second Amendment and shoot the anti-gun “ayes” of Congress out.