Well, there's been another shooting. If it was 1999 and this was Columbine, chances are you'd at least be somewhat roused by that statement. Chances are, you'd still remember the shooting 18 years later.
Due in part to our growing apathy as a society, and the high prevalence of mass shootings in the United States, you probably didn't even blink, and you're still angry about the headline of this take.
You're not angry for the 5 innocent people left dead in California, because that doesn't compare to the 58 in Vegas you're already tired of hearing about.
Now, you're thinking "California has some of the strictest gun laws in the United States-- how can she possibly posit an argument in favor of banning firearms, when she's already putting from the rough?"
Don't worry, I'm a realist. I know that as a nation that is home to as many guns as it is people (approx. 300 million) guns are too ingrained in our society and economy to ever be fully banned-- or even further restricted, in all likelihood.
However, I also know that this a fundamental part of why they should be.
The United States is a violent nation. For all of our wealth, technology and cultural advancements, we are a battleground compared to other first world nations. We don't even rank in the top 50 safest countries. We barely rank in the top 100.
Now, it's true that some of the countries with the world's highest safety ratings also have some of the highest amount of armed citizenry-- though, all are second to the U.S.
However, what this tells us is that these countries have worked out cultural issues within their society that cause them to use guns against people instead of, say, animals. We have proven that, as a nation, we are not responsible enough for devices with no other purpose than to cause grevious bodily harm.
A big argument in favor of keeping guns on the street is hunting-- but do Americans really love hunting all that much? Considering only 6% of Americans are hunters, the facts would indicate otherwise.
13% of Americans also smoke marijuana, which is illegal in most states. We don't enable our citizens' hobbies against the welfare of our society.
Considering the fact that nearly 50% of Americans know another person who has been shot, I'd say if we're hunting anyone, it's one another.
You've also heard a lot about this self-defense thing, but did you know that for every one self-defense shooting, there are 34 homicides, 78 suicides and two accidental deaths?
If guns are keeping one person safe for every 36 or so, can't we objectively say guns are dangerous and do more harm than good?
Because the fact is that most Americans don't own guns. About 70% of us have no guns at all, and half of all guns are owned by a minute 3%. We are flooding the market for criminals to obtain these weapons illegally, even if they couldn't otherwise be obtained legally. And who is it benefiting?
3% of Americans. The majority of whom have not obtained a college degree. Poor education can be linked to poverty, poverty to crime. We are enabling problems we know exist for the sake of what?
One might only suppose it's to line the pockets of organizations like the NRA. The same old story of corporate greed, and by tomorrow, you'll have already forgotten that there are 5 fresh bodies in a California morgue because of it.
Most Helpful Opinions