There are six of us. We are students of a Texas high school. We are Democrats and Republicans. We know that there are 54 entrances in our school. We're angry and tired and scared. Although we disagree on many topics, we’re united on change. We’re also reporters for our school newspaper, but our school administration heavily censors and limits what we are allowed to write, publish and post. We cannot write about things like tattoos, pregnancy, assault, bullying or in this case, school shootings and gun violence. It is for this reason we have bound together, outside the confines of our school and out of reach of our administration to write this.
Right now in American schools, we are not learning how to file taxes. Instead, we are learning how to make “bullet-proof” vests out of our textbooks. High schools across the country now have to unfortunately incorporate gun safety into their curriculum. It is a sad reality that never should have been brought into existence. For years, we have toiled over the problem of gun safety, and we have not made any real progress. Most of the time it’s because we try to create divisions in arguments where most people agree. A 2017 Gallup poll found that 96 percent of people in the United States were in favor of requiring background checks for all gun purchases. 75 percent were in favor of a 30-day waiting period, and 70 percent want all privately owned guns to be registered with the police. We can all agree that something can be and should be done to prevent future tragedies from occurring. Most of us are even able to agree on some of the steps to take. Blame who you want to blame for why we haven’t done anything: the media, the government, ourselves, but we can move past this to finally take the steps as one united front. This is not a partisan issue; truthfully, it is not bipartisan either. This is a humanitarian issue. As students, we have unfortunately grown up in an environment where mass shootings are an all too common occurrence, and according to some people, can only be helped with “thoughts and prayers”. With every school shooting, we feel as though we have been failed repeatedly by adults and lawmakers across the nation. We’ve seen them sit idly by as children were murdered in elementary schools. This inaction has established a precedent that harbors complicity, and it needs to end. We have been told there’s nothing that can be done to prevent such events, and we have been forced into complying with this mindset. But we are on the precipice of being able to vote and being the change we so wish to see. Instead of being armed with guns, we are armed with knowledge and passion. We are ready for change. After living through countless mass shootings, we’ve decided that change must happen, and it starts with legislation that regulates the purchase, sale and ownership of guns. Gun control has been a debate in this country for so many years now. In 1994, former presidents Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan wrote a letter to the House members that supported a ban on military-style assault rifles. The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban bill passed, and AK-47s and 18 other types of semiautomatic weapons could no longer be sold, at least until 2004 when the bill expired. According to the Washington Post, “mass shootings totaling six or more deaths dropped by 37 percent” in that decade. After the ban expired, the number of massacres increased by 183 percent and the number of massacre deaths increased by 239 percent. At one point, we had a better form of gun control, and it worked. So why are we not taking more measures to prevent further massacres from occuring? It seems to us that the lawmakers do not really care about the 58 people enjoying a concert in Las Vegas, the 49 in the Pulse nightclub, the 32 college students in Virginia Tech, the 20 elementary kids and seven teachers from Sandy Hook, the 17 victims in MSD and most recently, the ten that died in our own neighborhood. First, we must clarify: we do not want to ban all guns. We are simply calling for stricter national regulations that would make it more difficult for irresponsible and dangerous citizens to purchase guns in order to prevent unnecessary massacres. If you indeed are a good person with good intentions and plan on being a responsible gun owner, gun control should not scare you. You will still be able to pass your background checks and wait a reasonable time. And if you are not capable of completing these tasks, you should not own a gun. According to http://www.texasgunlaws.org/, to buy a handgun, shotgun or rifle in Texas, there is no waiting period and no required state registration. A permit is only required for a concealed handgun, and machine guns, suppressors, short-barreled firearms and “assault weapons” are all legal in the state of Texas. Nationwide, a federal background check is required to purchase a firearm from a licensed dealer, but firearm dealers are not required to obtain a state license.There is no limit to the number of firearms purchased at once, and there is no age requirement or license needed for buying ammunition. Despite these few “regulations”, there is still a lot of room for errors and abuse of these lax rules. When it comes to acquiring a weapon as dangerous as an AR15, which has been the accomplice in so many deaths, we can agree that it should not be in the hands of someone who will misuse it. According to the BBC, in Japan, it is illegal to own a handgun without proper measures. In order to obtain weapons in Japan, civilians must take a training course. They must then pass several tests including mental, drug and background tests; and every three years, they must retake these courses and tests to maintain their license. Japan has one of the lowest homicide rates in the world of 1 in 10 million. In America, that rate is 5 in 100,000. Similarly, after 13 mass shootings from 1979 to 1996, Australians tightened gun laws and now require citizens to show documented proof of a genuine need for a gun. But we understand that the US is not Japan or Australia. However, that doesn’t mean we have nothing to learn from them. Obviously, our culture is different; and we’re not calling for adopting the same measures, but we do believe that some form of common sense gun control must be taken, at the very least to alleviate mass shootings. The FBI’s website states that people who want to purchase a gun from a licensed dealer have to pass a National Instant Criminal Background Check. The problem is that no federal waiting period is required, giving impulsive shooters easy access to firearms. In addition, private dealers can sell long guns and handguns to 18 year olds while not being liable to any background checks. California states that purchasers must wait a ten day waiting period to receive their weapon, and Florida has a three day period. If a person believes a ten day period is excessive, they can reevaluate how important owning a gun really is. The ability to make in-store purchases degrades the power of a firearm, causing many people to handle guns carelessly. A waiting period would emphasize the capacity or power of guns and decrease the amount of impulse purchases. It is sickening to us that people believe these routine massacres are the price we have to pay for “freedom” when all that we ask is for all people (including responsible gun owners) to go through a reasonable screening and purchasing process of firearms. In our opinion, a little extra time and effort when buying a gun is a fair price to pay if it means preventing the deaths of innocent people. Why are we valuing guns and convenience more than human lives? We understand that we don’t know everything and we’re not claiming to. We know that what we propose isn’t going to solve everything, but we--our generation, the writers, the March-For-Our-Lives advocates, the victims, the survivors--hold a general consensus that the time of inaction is over and steps need to be taken in the right direction. Gun violence is going to be an issue in the US for an unforeseeable long time, but something, even the very minimum, needs to be done. We may be young, but do not underestimate us. Soon, the power of our voices will be witnessed in the ballots, so remember to listen to us. And to other soon-to be voters, now is when you decide where you want to be: behind the deaths of children and adults at the edge of their futures or against these unnecessary casualties. We are: a woman of science, a creationist, a liberal, a conservative, a person of color, a Caucasian, a straight person and a member of the LGBTQ+ community. We are young people everywhere. We are students. We are fed up. We have argued. We have compromised. We are the future. We are united. |
Afterword: Some arguments that need to be addressed.
“We should arm teachers or increase protection in schools!”
In theory, having trained and armed teachers might seem like a good idea, but the logistics are extremely flawed, especially when teachers are still expected to buy their own school supplies. The biggest and most glaring issue with arming teachers is the teachers themselves. Teachers are people, and like all people, they have their own flaws. Who’s to say that a teacher won't turn a gun on a student or that a student won't take that gun? Of course, it is difficult and even disturbing to consider that, but these are very real and dangerous possibilities.
Although there is nothing inherently wrong with increasing protection in schools, it's important to understand that lanyards, clear backpacks, and metal detectors are NOT the solution. If schools feel the need to implement higher security measures, they certainly have the right, but we need to understand that it's not just the schools that need to step up. Of course, safety is a priority for schools, but that safety should not interfere with the primary mission of education.
Increasing protection in schools is a temporary treatment for a symptom, not a cure for the disease. We--the people, schools and government--need to focus all efforts on the root of the problem.
School shootings are NOT occurring because there is not enough protection in schools. School shootings are occurring because certain people are getting ahold of guns far too easily that should not have access to those weapons in the first place.
“It's our 2nd Amendment right!”
The 2nd Amendment states that: “...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.”
Here, everyone likes to point to the right to bear arms, but in making this statement, we have to contextualize the Constitution. The Constitution was written in 1787 in a time when gun technology was still very limited and when having a gun was a necessity in the colonial wilderness. Since then guns have changed, and inevitably so should laws. Gone is the time where owning guns was a right, and now is the time when owning a gun should be a privilege one has to work to obtain and hold.
And in all honesty, if the United States government decided to take the military and use it against us, we would not stand a chance.
“Should we ban knives then?”
Firstly, our goal is not to ban guns but to simply add more regulations and make them harder to obtain. If you’re a responsible gun owner, gun control should not concern you. Secondly, guns and knives (or most other weapons for that matter) are not the same. The main difference between guns and knives is the biggest reason as to why they aren't and shouldn't be the same: mass killings. With a knife, killing 49 people like in the Pulse Nightclub or 58 like in the Las Vegas shooting is a much more difficult task. Put simply, you can't kill 50 people with a single knife at a far range like you can with a gun.
Of course, there have been certain mass stabbings in history like in China but overall, these are far less likely to occur and the survival chance is much higher. Sadly, violence is always going to be an issue, but it is our ethical responsibility to attempt to reduce the incidence of these types of events.
“Bad people will find a way around laws.”
Yes--that’s what makes them bad people, but if we elected to not pass any laws or regulations because, “people will find a way around them,” we might as well get rid of any and all laws. Why have a law against murder if people still kill? Why have a law against theft if people still steal? This argument is nothing more that an excuse to be complicit. Laws are meant to keep us safe. That is their sole purpose. Speed limit laws exist to prevent drivers from going 115 mph down a residential street. Food safety laws exist to keep people from being poisoned. Licensing laws exist to prevent those without any proper education and/or training from being something like a doctor or a pilot. Because of these laws, the general public is kept safer.
“I’m a law abiding citizen, why should I be punished for others’ wrongdoings?”
If you are truly a law abiding citizen, there is nothing to worry about. If you are a law abiding citizen, you will still pass background checks, you can wait until you are old enough, and you can be patient enough to wait a grace period after making a purchase. Just as all other laws, they do not serve as a punishment to those who follow them, they serve to protect them.
“It's a mental health issue.”
Mental health is definitely something that needs to be addressed, but it isn’t the sole issue. Some people say that shootings are just a mental health problem, that any behavioral or gun restrictions would only step on the feet of responsible gun owners. While some shootings have been performed by people with severe mental instabilities, they were able to take action because of society's carelessness. This carelessness left a gun hidden in their parents’ bedroom or gave them the ability to buy a gun from the show across their street, where no background checks were required. The main problem is not mental illness. It’s just a scapegoat to prevent any real change from occurring. Mental health problems exist around the world, so if that is truly the reason for mass shootings, then why do we not see the same amount of incidents across the world as in the United States? Not only are we continuing to ignore the needs of the mentally ill, but we are creating an even larger stigma around mental health issues while ignoring the real problem at hand.
“We should arm teachers or increase protection in schools!”
In theory, having trained and armed teachers might seem like a good idea, but the logistics are extremely flawed, especially when teachers are still expected to buy their own school supplies. The biggest and most glaring issue with arming teachers is the teachers themselves. Teachers are people, and like all people, they have their own flaws. Who’s to say that a teacher won't turn a gun on a student or that a student won't take that gun? Of course, it is difficult and even disturbing to consider that, but these are very real and dangerous possibilities.
Although there is nothing inherently wrong with increasing protection in schools, it's important to understand that lanyards, clear backpacks, and metal detectors are NOT the solution. If schools feel the need to implement higher security measures, they certainly have the right, but we need to understand that it's not just the schools that need to step up. Of course, safety is a priority for schools, but that safety should not interfere with the primary mission of education.
Increasing protection in schools is a temporary treatment for a symptom, not a cure for the disease. We--the people, schools and government--need to focus all efforts on the root of the problem.
School shootings are NOT occurring because there is not enough protection in schools. School shootings are occurring because certain people are getting ahold of guns far too easily that should not have access to those weapons in the first place.
“It's our 2nd Amendment right!”
The 2nd Amendment states that: “...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.”
Here, everyone likes to point to the right to bear arms, but in making this statement, we have to contextualize the Constitution. The Constitution was written in 1787 in a time when gun technology was still very limited and when having a gun was a necessity in the colonial wilderness. Since then guns have changed, and inevitably so should laws. Gone is the time where owning guns was a right, and now is the time when owning a gun should be a privilege one has to work to obtain and hold.
And in all honesty, if the United States government decided to take the military and use it against us, we would not stand a chance.
“Should we ban knives then?”
Firstly, our goal is not to ban guns but to simply add more regulations and make them harder to obtain. If you’re a responsible gun owner, gun control should not concern you. Secondly, guns and knives (or most other weapons for that matter) are not the same. The main difference between guns and knives is the biggest reason as to why they aren't and shouldn't be the same: mass killings. With a knife, killing 49 people like in the Pulse Nightclub or 58 like in the Las Vegas shooting is a much more difficult task. Put simply, you can't kill 50 people with a single knife at a far range like you can with a gun.
Of course, there have been certain mass stabbings in history like in China but overall, these are far less likely to occur and the survival chance is much higher. Sadly, violence is always going to be an issue, but it is our ethical responsibility to attempt to reduce the incidence of these types of events.
“Bad people will find a way around laws.”
Yes--that’s what makes them bad people, but if we elected to not pass any laws or regulations because, “people will find a way around them,” we might as well get rid of any and all laws. Why have a law against murder if people still kill? Why have a law against theft if people still steal? This argument is nothing more that an excuse to be complicit. Laws are meant to keep us safe. That is their sole purpose. Speed limit laws exist to prevent drivers from going 115 mph down a residential street. Food safety laws exist to keep people from being poisoned. Licensing laws exist to prevent those without any proper education and/or training from being something like a doctor or a pilot. Because of these laws, the general public is kept safer.
“I’m a law abiding citizen, why should I be punished for others’ wrongdoings?”
If you are truly a law abiding citizen, there is nothing to worry about. If you are a law abiding citizen, you will still pass background checks, you can wait until you are old enough, and you can be patient enough to wait a grace period after making a purchase. Just as all other laws, they do not serve as a punishment to those who follow them, they serve to protect them.
“It's a mental health issue.”
Mental health is definitely something that needs to be addressed, but it isn’t the sole issue. Some people say that shootings are just a mental health problem, that any behavioral or gun restrictions would only step on the feet of responsible gun owners. While some shootings have been performed by people with severe mental instabilities, they were able to take action because of society's carelessness. This carelessness left a gun hidden in their parents’ bedroom or gave them the ability to buy a gun from the show across their street, where no background checks were required. The main problem is not mental illness. It’s just a scapegoat to prevent any real change from occurring. Mental health problems exist around the world, so if that is truly the reason for mass shootings, then why do we not see the same amount of incidents across the world as in the United States? Not only are we continuing to ignore the needs of the mentally ill, but we are creating an even larger stigma around mental health issues while ignoring the real problem at hand.