Trump says that there should be more people who own guns that way civilians can protect themselves from events like the one in California. Some people think that owning a gun is better than no personal protection. Quite a few people agree with these point of views, but I don’t. Gun ownership is what started the trend of kids killing their family on accident. Gun ownership is what started the trend of school shootings and helped accomplish teenage suicides. The laws of gun ownership need to change.
The reason why citizens of the United Sates own guns has to do with the formation of the country they live in. At the time of the revolution, there was no standing army. What would have been the equivalent of the army in that time period would have been a militia of armed civilians living in the colonies of the new world. The citizens of the newly formed country had the right to bear arms because it was a militia that defeated the British, not an army. Therefore, in order to keep the militia strong, the politicians of that time agreed to have the civilians bear arms. This was so that gun owners would always be on hand if they were needed.
In the modern world, the militia doesn’t exist. In the world of the 21st century, there is a standing army that protects the United States. Since there is no militia, there is no reason to own a gun outside of hunting; humans don’t hunt human beings, so the average person should not own a gun for the average person does not hunt.
If Congress were to take away the right to bear arms, then surely the citizens of their country would raise an outcry and possibly revolt. I’m not asking for the law to be taken away, although I wish it could be, but what the previous paragraph implies is that the law should be changed to the following:
- If a civilian wishes to purchase a weapon, a background check must occur.
- If they were interrogated by police in the previous 5 years (numbers could vary), then the purchase can not happen.
- If they were arrested in the past ten years, then the purchase can not occur.
- If the civilian not a citizen of the country that they live in, then the purchase cannot happen.
- If they have any sign of mental health issue when the civilian met a psychologist, then the purchase can not occur.
- The doctor and the psychologist of the civilian must agree to the transaction. This would be done so that any health related excuse as to why the civilian may or may not have killed someone in the future with the weapon can not be used to justify the murder.
- There must be a permit that is updated every year for the civilian to keep the weapon or else the weapon will be removed from the possession of the civilian.
- The civilian must clearly state why the weapon is being purchased.
- If the permit is being updated, the civilian has the option to also update the uses for the weapon.
- If the weapon is used for something that the civilian did not specify, then the civilian can be tried in court on the basis of mishandling a lethal weapon.
- The civilian’s doctor and psychologist must approve the renewal of the permit and any changes to the uses of the weapon.
- A safe must be purchased with the weapon so that when the weapon is not being used, it will not be used by someone other than the civilian who bought the weapon.
- If a person were to go to court over the misconduct of a weapon, the company and clerk who sold the weapon must also be present in court.
More items could be added to the list, but the list is a rough outline of things that could change to make the world safer in the United States. If Congress were to make these changes, then perhaps gun ownership would affect so many people because people would not want to go through the lengthy process of possessing a gun.
If the citizens of the United States were not to raise an outcry at the idea of “not being able to protect themselves”, then one could agree that guns would not be bought by civilians unless they have an hunting permit. Once the hunting permit expires, the gun permit also expires. People like Trump don’t understand that if there were no guns at all, then so one would have to protect themselves. If there were no weapons being unleashed upon humankind in the United States, then the only protection needed would be from the army and the police. It is not the duty of the citizen to protect himself or herself, but rather it is the duty of the police, army, navy, air force, marines, or the local fire fighters to protect the citizen from OUTSIDE threats. If there were no guns owned in this country, then there would not be any threats from the inside.
One of many problems in the modern world concerning guns and other weapons is that any Joe Shmoe, as the saying goes, can buy a gun for any reason they choose. One hears on the news frequently that the reason for the recent murder of 5 innocent people is because the person holding the weapon had “mental challenges”. People who are not of sound mind and of sound soul are in possession of lethal weapons and have the potential to create havoc and misfortune in their communities.
This is one small aspect of the society I live in that makes the world so much less inviting to live in. If the reader would like to add some ideas on how to create a stricter and safer way to obtain a weapon, please comment below.