By: Jasmine Basa
When the founders of America created the 2nd Amendment, firearms were treated as a form of protection in cases of war or government tyranny. However, there is no war to fight for anymore.
Instead, we fight wars amongst ourselves.
According to Oxford University, firearm study from academic.oup.com, 90% of suicides have been done through firearms.
Furthermore, the American Sociological Association (asanet.org) states the United States is reported as the country with the most mass shootings despite having 5% of the world’s population as of 2019.
Joey Garcia, a 17-year-old Yerba Buena student who aspires to be a lawyer, comments on the issue: “It’s everywhere—from real life, media, and stories from other people. It’s like it never ends.”
As of 2019, an uprise of mass shootings has brought the topic of gun violence to mainstream media. News has been flooded with the faces of numerous gunmen day by day, haunting Americans around the world.
Hieu Tran, a senior at Yerba Buena, is also rather concerned about the issue: “...It’s especially scary going into large crowds or public events because of these shootings.”
Yet, the constant coverage of mass shootings hides the starting point of the history of gun violence; there is more to the controversy of guns besides the topic of mass shooters. The topic is more centralized on the deaths of people--human beings--not the numbers they add to our death count.
In fact, most gun violence is not from mass shootings. Even before the unfortunate events of the Gilroy Garlic Festival and El Paso as of early August, respectively, gun violence has played a big role in American deaths.
Nevertheless, the news coverage has done a decent job of presenting the flaws in America’s gun legislation. As the overall media sets the table on the topic of legislation, it is good at leaving the taste of “what if?” in people’s mouths when it comes to gun laws.
It even has a few “side dishes” to it, as topics of racism, homophobia, religious discrimination, white supremacy, and mental health are brought into the spotlight as well. Both the media and audience have connected the dots between the groups attacked (LGBT, People of Color) and white supremacy.
According to christianitytoday.com, “Since 2017, white extremists have targeted victims in eight US attacks, but the El Paso shooting was the most deadly, The New York Times reported. The ideology has been linked to at least four of the ten worst “active shooter incidents” in the country.”
Hailey Tran, a Senior at Yerba Buena High School, is saddened by the targeted demographic: “Certain minority groups being targeted with gun violence is absolutely horrid. There is no reason for them to be harmed for being different.”
An anonymous transgender male says, “In some spaces, I feel uncomfortable. But in others I wouldn’t. I’m just at the start of my transition from FtM (Female to Male) and there’s places I’m going to consistently be in during this time. In a few of them I feel safe and fine but in others I’m worried about confrontation from people noticing the outward changes. It’s not even a feeling of fear for me it’s just dread and tiredness. I don’t want to live in a country that abhors my very existence.”
People are angered by how specifically minorities are targeted. When we consider mass shootings like the Charleston Church shooting (attacked African Americans) and Orlando Nightclub shootings (LGBT), this is something to consider. People have connected the mass shootings with Donald Trump’s motivation to build a wall.
“Nineteenth-century racism was this-worldly, affirming the status quo. Today’s racism is focused on the future America, whiter and greater. Donald Trump has obviously helped construct this racism...And his statements resonate with some would-be gunmen, like the El Paso murderer whose on-line manifesto alluded to a Mexican “invasion” of the U.S. It is quite likely that the present pattern of routine white nationalist mass-shootings will continue,” says Counterpunch.com.
Democrats and Republicans alike have publicly debated on the issue.
According to Chandelis Duster from CNN, some democrats, presidential candidates, like Senator Elizabeth Warren, have even criticized McConnell and the Trump administration for the stagnancy in gun laws.
Yet, the issue isn’t necessarily divided into political parties alone. Democrats like former Senator Boxer William Butchko and a former employee of the Treasury Department in Washington, DC, feel the topic of guns it unnecessarily oversaturated.
Butchko states, “The media should not allow hysteria about the issue. While guns kill many, there are far greater threats. No one is really for complete gun confiscation. There should also be more fact-checking of the pro-gun side since no reputable study show guns increasing safety and the NRA opposes more neutral studies being done. However, I think with the Heller decision as to the precedent, it would be fair for gun supporters to just say that they like guns and that restriction is an infringement of those rights. That would lead to a more honest discourse than allowing one side to lying about safety issues. However, the media should do a better job of stopping the hyperbole of some gun control advocates.”
Such constant news coverage on shootings might—as ironically as a journalist such as myself may inform—encourage more shootings.
A new study from tandfonline.com states, “This work finds the media is distorting the reality of mass public shootings. Prior research has shown that many mass shooters have explicitly admitted they want fame and have directly reached out to media organizations to get it,” the researchers noted.
Others feel that it is an important topic to consider, and the mass media has actually helped bring such a topic into consideration.
Team ENOUGH is a Pro-Gun Control organization dedicated to both educating in mobilizing the youth on the topic of firearms, gun violence, and gun legislation.
Kara Chine, a community organizer for Team ENOUGH, feels strongly on highlighting and patching such holes in lenient gun legislation.
“...As for what brings me, personally, to this movement, I am a mother of 2 teens in public schools. I worry about school shootings, as do they. I know that school shootings are only a small percentage of overall gun deaths, but they terrify me and my kids because the largest number of gun deaths comes from suicide. And often suicide is attached to school shootings when the shooter is a student. Also, I was a teacher at a school that suffered a shooting back when this was rare--Santana High. My colleague died, students, I knew were either killed or permanently disabled. So this issue is very real to me,” says Kara.
Kara explains even further, “If anything else (like a disease or a terrorist) was killing that many Americans every year, it would be dubbed a horrific crisis that needs intervention ASAP (as soon as possible). But it gets tolerated for some reason when it's Americans killing Americans. Also, this is a critical issue because of its impact on young people. They cannot vote, and yet they have to bear the brunt of this dangerous environment that they cannot do anything about. That is why I help them speak out.”
Some feel the importance of guns depends on the circumstances.
“The importance of gun violence depends on how bad the situation is at the time,” Nhi Vo, a Senior at Yerba Buena High School states.
The overall topic has brought in numerous concerns—with the main controversy being on how to not necessarily “solve” the issue, but how to restrain it.
One of the primary suggestions being a Red Flag Law. Yet, what necessarily is a red flag law?
When one considers a Red Flag Law, one could consider literal red flags.
Nathalie Baptiste from motherjones.com explains, “Red flag laws, sometimes called extreme risk protection order laws, allow a judge to issue an order that enables law enforcement to confiscate guns from individuals deemed a risk to themselves or others. Since the Parkland shooting, at least two dozen states have considered enacting similar laws in their states.”
In simpler terms, when a gun owner seems rather unfit (perhaps homicidal or suicidal) to own a gun, a witness can report said person to have their gun revoked.
Butchko also states, “I think that at the very least we need universal background checks and red flag laws. David French makes a persuasive argument that would be a fair compromise for both sides.”
He also refers to the article, “A Gun-Control Measure Conservatives Should Consider” by David French, on nationalreview.com. An article, that in short, establishes the need for guns to be constipated not from everyone, but from dangerous people.
Chine insists, “[The federal government should do] Universal background checks for every gun owner. Not state by state, as that doesn't matter when people just drive over borders freely. No one with a criminal record or a history of certain kinds of mental illness still has the right to own a gun. Red flag laws granted to roommates, family, teachers and coworkers and training for law enforcement to know how to support the community in using these. Banning assault weapons or rapid-fire weapons - specifically AR15s and similar weapons that have no purpose (in hunting or self-protection) other than to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time. They are strictly weapons for war, and most veterans will back that up. Even the way one is shot with these is all about the kill, as it is designed to hit and tear apart flesh, rather than pass through. The military made it this way so that one will bleed out when getting hit, no matter where. We also think the country needs safe storage laws, meaning that your firearm is locked with a trigger lock or in a safe when not in use. This would save 900 small children a year that die in accidents with their parents unlocked guns, and countless suicides by teens with access to parent's unlocked firearms.”
An anonymous Libeterian student suggests, “This would never work...but ideally I think the following would work wonders for gun ownership: temporarily confiscate everyone’s firearms, everybody. Then offer to return them should the person agree to lengthy and in depth mental and background checks and analysis to ensure they are of sound state and mind to own a lethal weapon. If they pass the tests and can fill in the correct paperwork and such, they can receive their gun(s) back. But that’s in an ideal situation. As it stands, with the state of the US today and the kind of things a lot of people who do own guns are saying, it feels safest and best to just take everyone’s guns away because people are insane.”
Yet, such a proposal is rather controversial; to take away everyone’s guns could actually do more harm than good. Not only does it go against the second amendment, but affect those who rely on guns.
According to the RAND Corporation (rand.org), “According to the most recent federal data, from 2011, approximately 13 million people used firearms for hunting, more than 50 percent of all hunters participated in target shooting, and 22 percent of hunters visited shooting ranges.”
“[The] 2nd amendment is still important and everyone should have a chance to defend themselves,” argues Tommy Vuu.
Some say this is a topic of education, rather than legislation, and that guns are glorified within the America, which cushions the issue of gun violence.
“I think they should educate. The kids they’re teaching are the ones who could grow up to become these mass shooters and hateful, cruel people who murder others simply because of minor differences. If they start young on educating kids on issues like this (age appropriate, of course, so they can understand), and raise them to be understanding and kind and accepting, there will be less and less people who pose a threat later in life. And for the people who are mentally disturbed and that is the cause of their violence, teaching people the signs of toxic behavior and having services available to help people like that will also help limit the number of dangerous people with access to lethal weapons. If we stop treating them as criminal outsiders and more as mentally disturbed (whether through illness or a fault in the brain’s development) people who need help, it could drastically lower the rate of death by mass shootings. Along with treating guns like the danger they are and not as easy to acquire playthings,” says an anonymous student.
Others feel hopeless about ever fixing the issue of gun violence, and do not see an issue with the right to bear arms. However, still feel there should be some law adjustments from the government.
Tommy Vuu, a Yerba Buena Senior who sides with pro-guns, “I’m Pro-Gun because even if we regulate or ban firearms, people will still find some way to obtain firearms and conduct shootings. There should also be programs or policies that allow people of a certain age limit (preferably adults) to learn how to use a firearm responsibly.”
According to Washingtonpost.com, as of August 1966 to October 2019, there has been a grand total of 320 guns in most mass shootings. 179 of these guns have been retrieved legally, with 61 being obtained illegally, and the remaining 80 unclear as to whether obtained legally or illegally.
The debate on gun law is rather constant, but is slowly grinding to a halt in terms of media. However, both sides have especially felt the federal government should at least act on the issue of gun violence instead of remaining silent.
Whether one is pro-gun or pro-control, both are avids for keeping eachother safe. Pro-gun activists prefer to have their guns to protect themselves. Pro gun control supporters prefer to restrict guns to prevent potential threats from having dangerous weapons.
At the end of the day—there is no “controversy” on gun legislation. Both sides want the same thing—to feel safe in a country that’s grown admittedly dangerous within our neighborhood.
Both sides want change.
Despite the stagnancy in current gun legislation—as of October 2019—such a thing should not discourage us to make some changes in our legislation.
Instead of dividing the country in half on the topic of guns, perhaps we should be targeting the government. Everyone is in favor of protecting lives and enforcing change. If you’re eligible to vote in the 2020 election and don’t like it the stagnancy: vote.
You get the government you vote for.
After all, America is nothing without the people that make it—the voices, the ambitions, the People.
When the founders of America created the 2nd Amendment, firearms were treated as a form of protection in cases of war or government tyranny. However, there is no war to fight for anymore.
Instead, we fight wars amongst ourselves.
According to Oxford University, firearm study from academic.oup.com, 90% of suicides have been done through firearms.
Furthermore, the American Sociological Association (asanet.org) states the United States is reported as the country with the most mass shootings despite having 5% of the world’s population as of 2019.
Joey Garcia, a 17-year-old Yerba Buena student who aspires to be a lawyer, comments on the issue: “It’s everywhere—from real life, media, and stories from other people. It’s like it never ends.”
As of 2019, an uprise of mass shootings has brought the topic of gun violence to mainstream media. News has been flooded with the faces of numerous gunmen day by day, haunting Americans around the world.
Hieu Tran, a senior at Yerba Buena, is also rather concerned about the issue: “...It’s especially scary going into large crowds or public events because of these shootings.”
Yet, the constant coverage of mass shootings hides the starting point of the history of gun violence; there is more to the controversy of guns besides the topic of mass shooters. The topic is more centralized on the deaths of people--human beings--not the numbers they add to our death count.
In fact, most gun violence is not from mass shootings. Even before the unfortunate events of the Gilroy Garlic Festival and El Paso as of early August, respectively, gun violence has played a big role in American deaths.
Nevertheless, the news coverage has done a decent job of presenting the flaws in America’s gun legislation. As the overall media sets the table on the topic of legislation, it is good at leaving the taste of “what if?” in people’s mouths when it comes to gun laws.
It even has a few “side dishes” to it, as topics of racism, homophobia, religious discrimination, white supremacy, and mental health are brought into the spotlight as well. Both the media and audience have connected the dots between the groups attacked (LGBT, People of Color) and white supremacy.
According to christianitytoday.com, “Since 2017, white extremists have targeted victims in eight US attacks, but the El Paso shooting was the most deadly, The New York Times reported. The ideology has been linked to at least four of the ten worst “active shooter incidents” in the country.”
Hailey Tran, a Senior at Yerba Buena High School, is saddened by the targeted demographic: “Certain minority groups being targeted with gun violence is absolutely horrid. There is no reason for them to be harmed for being different.”
An anonymous transgender male says, “In some spaces, I feel uncomfortable. But in others I wouldn’t. I’m just at the start of my transition from FtM (Female to Male) and there’s places I’m going to consistently be in during this time. In a few of them I feel safe and fine but in others I’m worried about confrontation from people noticing the outward changes. It’s not even a feeling of fear for me it’s just dread and tiredness. I don’t want to live in a country that abhors my very existence.”
People are angered by how specifically minorities are targeted. When we consider mass shootings like the Charleston Church shooting (attacked African Americans) and Orlando Nightclub shootings (LGBT), this is something to consider. People have connected the mass shootings with Donald Trump’s motivation to build a wall.
“Nineteenth-century racism was this-worldly, affirming the status quo. Today’s racism is focused on the future America, whiter and greater. Donald Trump has obviously helped construct this racism...And his statements resonate with some would-be gunmen, like the El Paso murderer whose on-line manifesto alluded to a Mexican “invasion” of the U.S. It is quite likely that the present pattern of routine white nationalist mass-shootings will continue,” says Counterpunch.com.
Democrats and Republicans alike have publicly debated on the issue.
According to Chandelis Duster from CNN, some democrats, presidential candidates, like Senator Elizabeth Warren, have even criticized McConnell and the Trump administration for the stagnancy in gun laws.
Yet, the issue isn’t necessarily divided into political parties alone. Democrats like former Senator Boxer William Butchko and a former employee of the Treasury Department in Washington, DC, feel the topic of guns it unnecessarily oversaturated.
Butchko states, “The media should not allow hysteria about the issue. While guns kill many, there are far greater threats. No one is really for complete gun confiscation. There should also be more fact-checking of the pro-gun side since no reputable study show guns increasing safety and the NRA opposes more neutral studies being done. However, I think with the Heller decision as to the precedent, it would be fair for gun supporters to just say that they like guns and that restriction is an infringement of those rights. That would lead to a more honest discourse than allowing one side to lying about safety issues. However, the media should do a better job of stopping the hyperbole of some gun control advocates.”
Such constant news coverage on shootings might—as ironically as a journalist such as myself may inform—encourage more shootings.
A new study from tandfonline.com states, “This work finds the media is distorting the reality of mass public shootings. Prior research has shown that many mass shooters have explicitly admitted they want fame and have directly reached out to media organizations to get it,” the researchers noted.
Others feel that it is an important topic to consider, and the mass media has actually helped bring such a topic into consideration.
Team ENOUGH is a Pro-Gun Control organization dedicated to both educating in mobilizing the youth on the topic of firearms, gun violence, and gun legislation.
Kara Chine, a community organizer for Team ENOUGH, feels strongly on highlighting and patching such holes in lenient gun legislation.
“...As for what brings me, personally, to this movement, I am a mother of 2 teens in public schools. I worry about school shootings, as do they. I know that school shootings are only a small percentage of overall gun deaths, but they terrify me and my kids because the largest number of gun deaths comes from suicide. And often suicide is attached to school shootings when the shooter is a student. Also, I was a teacher at a school that suffered a shooting back when this was rare--Santana High. My colleague died, students, I knew were either killed or permanently disabled. So this issue is very real to me,” says Kara.
Kara explains even further, “If anything else (like a disease or a terrorist) was killing that many Americans every year, it would be dubbed a horrific crisis that needs intervention ASAP (as soon as possible). But it gets tolerated for some reason when it's Americans killing Americans. Also, this is a critical issue because of its impact on young people. They cannot vote, and yet they have to bear the brunt of this dangerous environment that they cannot do anything about. That is why I help them speak out.”
Some feel the importance of guns depends on the circumstances.
“The importance of gun violence depends on how bad the situation is at the time,” Nhi Vo, a Senior at Yerba Buena High School states.
The overall topic has brought in numerous concerns—with the main controversy being on how to not necessarily “solve” the issue, but how to restrain it.
One of the primary suggestions being a Red Flag Law. Yet, what necessarily is a red flag law?
When one considers a Red Flag Law, one could consider literal red flags.
Nathalie Baptiste from motherjones.com explains, “Red flag laws, sometimes called extreme risk protection order laws, allow a judge to issue an order that enables law enforcement to confiscate guns from individuals deemed a risk to themselves or others. Since the Parkland shooting, at least two dozen states have considered enacting similar laws in their states.”
In simpler terms, when a gun owner seems rather unfit (perhaps homicidal or suicidal) to own a gun, a witness can report said person to have their gun revoked.
Butchko also states, “I think that at the very least we need universal background checks and red flag laws. David French makes a persuasive argument that would be a fair compromise for both sides.”
He also refers to the article, “A Gun-Control Measure Conservatives Should Consider” by David French, on nationalreview.com. An article, that in short, establishes the need for guns to be constipated not from everyone, but from dangerous people.
Chine insists, “[The federal government should do] Universal background checks for every gun owner. Not state by state, as that doesn't matter when people just drive over borders freely. No one with a criminal record or a history of certain kinds of mental illness still has the right to own a gun. Red flag laws granted to roommates, family, teachers and coworkers and training for law enforcement to know how to support the community in using these. Banning assault weapons or rapid-fire weapons - specifically AR15s and similar weapons that have no purpose (in hunting or self-protection) other than to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time. They are strictly weapons for war, and most veterans will back that up. Even the way one is shot with these is all about the kill, as it is designed to hit and tear apart flesh, rather than pass through. The military made it this way so that one will bleed out when getting hit, no matter where. We also think the country needs safe storage laws, meaning that your firearm is locked with a trigger lock or in a safe when not in use. This would save 900 small children a year that die in accidents with their parents unlocked guns, and countless suicides by teens with access to parent's unlocked firearms.”
An anonymous Libeterian student suggests, “This would never work...but ideally I think the following would work wonders for gun ownership: temporarily confiscate everyone’s firearms, everybody. Then offer to return them should the person agree to lengthy and in depth mental and background checks and analysis to ensure they are of sound state and mind to own a lethal weapon. If they pass the tests and can fill in the correct paperwork and such, they can receive their gun(s) back. But that’s in an ideal situation. As it stands, with the state of the US today and the kind of things a lot of people who do own guns are saying, it feels safest and best to just take everyone’s guns away because people are insane.”
Yet, such a proposal is rather controversial; to take away everyone’s guns could actually do more harm than good. Not only does it go against the second amendment, but affect those who rely on guns.
According to the RAND Corporation (rand.org), “According to the most recent federal data, from 2011, approximately 13 million people used firearms for hunting, more than 50 percent of all hunters participated in target shooting, and 22 percent of hunters visited shooting ranges.”
“[The] 2nd amendment is still important and everyone should have a chance to defend themselves,” argues Tommy Vuu.
Some say this is a topic of education, rather than legislation, and that guns are glorified within the America, which cushions the issue of gun violence.
“I think they should educate. The kids they’re teaching are the ones who could grow up to become these mass shooters and hateful, cruel people who murder others simply because of minor differences. If they start young on educating kids on issues like this (age appropriate, of course, so they can understand), and raise them to be understanding and kind and accepting, there will be less and less people who pose a threat later in life. And for the people who are mentally disturbed and that is the cause of their violence, teaching people the signs of toxic behavior and having services available to help people like that will also help limit the number of dangerous people with access to lethal weapons. If we stop treating them as criminal outsiders and more as mentally disturbed (whether through illness or a fault in the brain’s development) people who need help, it could drastically lower the rate of death by mass shootings. Along with treating guns like the danger they are and not as easy to acquire playthings,” says an anonymous student.
Others feel hopeless about ever fixing the issue of gun violence, and do not see an issue with the right to bear arms. However, still feel there should be some law adjustments from the government.
Tommy Vuu, a Yerba Buena Senior who sides with pro-guns, “I’m Pro-Gun because even if we regulate or ban firearms, people will still find some way to obtain firearms and conduct shootings. There should also be programs or policies that allow people of a certain age limit (preferably adults) to learn how to use a firearm responsibly.”
According to Washingtonpost.com, as of August 1966 to October 2019, there has been a grand total of 320 guns in most mass shootings. 179 of these guns have been retrieved legally, with 61 being obtained illegally, and the remaining 80 unclear as to whether obtained legally or illegally.
The debate on gun law is rather constant, but is slowly grinding to a halt in terms of media. However, both sides have especially felt the federal government should at least act on the issue of gun violence instead of remaining silent.
Whether one is pro-gun or pro-control, both are avids for keeping eachother safe. Pro-gun activists prefer to have their guns to protect themselves. Pro gun control supporters prefer to restrict guns to prevent potential threats from having dangerous weapons.
At the end of the day—there is no “controversy” on gun legislation. Both sides want the same thing—to feel safe in a country that’s grown admittedly dangerous within our neighborhood.
Both sides want change.
Despite the stagnancy in current gun legislation—as of October 2019—such a thing should not discourage us to make some changes in our legislation.
Instead of dividing the country in half on the topic of guns, perhaps we should be targeting the government. Everyone is in favor of protecting lives and enforcing change. If you’re eligible to vote in the 2020 election and don’t like it the stagnancy: vote.
You get the government you vote for.
After all, America is nothing without the people that make it—the voices, the ambitions, the People.