There’s a variety of arguments that could be generated about yesterday’s shooting at Virginia Tech. One could argue that it’s sickening that it took school officials 2 hours after the first shooting to send out a warning email. Another argument could be that people that identified Cho as a “loner”might have noticed something wrong if they had spent more time with him. Ultimately there’s only one argument that makes any sense.
“The right to bear arms” is a flawed and inaccurate argument: handguns should be illegal.
Our constitutional right to bear arms deals with the theory that the people should have the right to fight against an oppressive, tyrannical government. In that case, they have the right to bear arms, form militias, and fight the government. The fact that any citizen needs to have a semi-automatic or a handgun is pure fiction.
“What about my right to defend myself?”
The only reason why a citizen of the USA feels that they need a gun is to protect themselves from other people with guns. When I studied abroad in London, I was amazed when it was a huge story that someone had been killed by a knifing. First, murders hardly ever happen over there. In 2006: London had “2.1 cases of murder, infanticide or manslaughter per 100,000.” Washington, DC alone had 67 cases of outright murder. Second, I much rather take my chances against someone with a knife. They can’t really shoot me down from 100 feet away with a knife and I might be able to survive a knifing.
I’m not arguing that a few people wouldn’t be able to get their hands on illegal guns each year. But if such a law was passed, monitoring these sales would be much easier. It could lead to prevention of crimes like that which took place at Virginia Tech. For a country as advanced and progressive (ha!) as the USA, we need to protect our citizens and ban the ownership of handguns.
April 17th, 2007 at 8:26 pm
- I’m not arguing that a few people wouldn’t be able to get their hands on illegal guns each year. -
You win the small cranium award…
April 17th, 2007 at 11:38 pm
Yes, nothing quite says “big cranium” like quoting someone and throwing out a quick insult with no argument or position.
But in all seriousness, if you cut down significantly on the number of guns available to people, crime will be reduced. I’m not saying that the Virginia Tech incident could have been avoided, but there’s a good chance it might never have happened.
Banning handguns isn’t about eliminating murder altogether–it’s about reducing the murder rate to the same level as other comparable nations.
February 16th, 2008 at 12:15 am
[…] Cho Seung-Hi shot students at Virginia Tech, I wrote a post about how gun control is needed: I’m not arguing that a few people wouldn’t be able to get […]