Jacques 1

Angelica Jacques
John Kubler
English 114B
25 February 2014
If We Cannot Get Rid of Them, Then Lets Restrict Them
It was a beautiful spring morning in Southern California and Jennifer had just dropped
her kids off at Bryn Mawr Elementary School. As Jennifer yelled out the window I love
you!not knowing this would be the last time she said that to themher kids faces turned
bright red from embarrassment, a smile appeared on their faces as they looked back at their mom
and then they kept walking to their classroom. Kyle and Kylie were twins and they were in the
first grade. They loved school so much. The twins walked into their classroom like it was any
other day. They went through their daily morning rituals of saying the pledge of allegiance and
listening to the daily announcements read by their principal. After the students got back from
their morning recess at about 10:15, the unimaginable happened. In walked a man, who was
armed with multiple guns and sadly, he went classroom to classroom shooting almost every child
in sight. There were 57 kids and teachers lost that day and the incident will forever weigh on
peoples hearts.
As we reflect on the story above, we may ask ourselves How could this situation be
avoided? or What could we have done so this tragedy wouldnt have occurred? These
questions pose very controversial arguments on what the gun laws should be. Everyone wants to
be and feel protected in his or her life and it is odd that in most places that we should feel as if
we are secure and safesuch as schools, malls, movie theatres, and public eventhave recently
proven to us to not be safe at all. In todays day in age, we never know what to expect so we
Jacques 2

have to be ready for every situation but how ready should we be? In the Second Amendment of
the Constitution of the United States, it says 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
(Proof Founding Fathers, 2013). All in all, this means that we as Americans have the right to
bear arms. The problem that arises with this amendment is that times and technology have
changed from when this was first written.
The AR-15 rifle is referred to as Americas Gun for many reasons, some of which are
good and some of which are bad. The AR-15 rifle is an awesome gun for target shooting, [its]
range, and self defense says a Dentist who owns this rifle (Americas Gun, 2013). But some
believe that this gun is too powerful of a weapon for civilians to own. It is often times used by
police officers that are trained on when and how to use it and it is also a highly powerful weapon
that has, at one point, taken out a whole elementary school and movie theatre. How much
control should there be over purchasing guns? Should we still go along with what our founding
fathers wanted or should we adjust our laws because of the adjusting and changing times?
It is inevitable that no matter what side you take when it comes to gun control, you will
feel very strongly about the issue. Those who take the side that there should not be gun control
put forth great arguments some of which can be backed up with the Federalist Papers. Some of
the other arguments are also justifiable but does that make it ok for there not to be gun control?
James Madison believed that Citizens [should be] equally armed as standing military and he
even stated this in the Federalist Papers, number forty-six (Anti-Gun Liberal, 2013). The
Federalist Papers were written just about two hundred and twenty seven years ago and, since
then, the development of the gun and all other technology has drastically changed. When the
Federalist papers were written, it was possible for civilians to be as equally armed as the military.
Jacques 3

Now that technological advances in our defense system have increased, it is not feasible for
individuals and groups to be armed equal to our military. I highly doubt that when the papers
were being written, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay could have even
imagined what a gun would be like today and the amount of damage that one could do.
Another argument that is brought up with gun control and how there shouldnt be
restrictions placed on them is that guns provide self defense in times of havoc. But isnt that
what the police are for? Not according to Keith Morgan! He believes that with the Criminal
element in our society we need more protection (Anti-Gun Liberal, 2013). He also believes that
according to the constitution, law enforcement does not have any duty to protect us citizens,
which in my opinion is complete blasphemy. We have law enforcement for protection in times
of need when we need a little extra help with a situation. One may argue that they have
awesome shooting accuracy, but normal civilians are not trained on how to act upon and shoot
guns in times of emergency. So, it is only fair that police officers get to carry intense weapons
because they are the trained ones. The police put their lives in danger every day to keep us safe
and it is very unappreciative of people to not be thankful for their service of protection.
When it comes to our safety, one may argue that we need guns so that if the police cannot
make it to the emergency in time, we can take care of it ourselves. But if it were more difficult
for all people to obtain guns then there wouldnt be as much threat to our safety either. If we put
a ban on guns, then there wouldnt be as many killings each year. In Japan, where there are very
strict gun laws, forbidding ownership, they only had Eleven gun related homicides in 2008,
where as America had Over 12,000 firearm related homicides in that same year (Are You
Ready For, 2013). This fact should make politicians and civilians wonder if they are fighting for
the right thing. Why would someone want to fight for a cause that will end up killing more
Jacques 4

people in the end? These statistics arent just numbers, it is thousands of families hurting each
and everyday because their loved one either got brutally killed or brutally killed themselves. Our
government is supposed to protect us, not place us in more harmful environments.
Aside from reducing the number of homicides, gun control needs to be implemented to
control who is allowed to obtain a gun. There are 39 states in which there arent any gun
restrictions while purchasing a gun (Americas Gun, 2013). Also, when purchasing your gun in
a private sale, the seller, by law, is not required to run a background check on you! With that
being said, almost anyone can purchase a gun! In the states that do require background checks to
purchase a gun, these checks are truly not good enough to determine whether someone should be
allowed to purchase a gun or not. The checks only bring up criminal history, not military or
mental health history, which I believe, is the root of the problem. Sure, someone can have a
clean criminal record, but that does not mean that they do not have any mental health related
issues that should stop them from owning a gun. In some of the most recent shootings,
Newtown, Connecticut and Aurora, Coloradothe gunmen had suffered from mental setbacks.
But yet, both gunmen were allowed to purchase their gun. These tragic killings could have
easily been avoided if the men were not granted the ability to get guns. However, if the United
States government is not going to restrict people from owning guns, then they should at least
make it harder to obtain such a deadly weapon.
It is really hard for most people to imagine losing someone to gun violence. We can all
sympathize with losing a loved one, but losing someone unexpectedly is even worse because you
do not get to have a proper goodbye. When someone is killed accidentally, for example, a car
accident, it is a little easier to grasp, but when a loved one is killed due to personal one on one
violence, it is even harder comprehend. When we find out that a loved one is slowly passing
Jacques 5

away, we have time to reflect and take in the thought of not having them in our life anymore.
However, when someone is lost unexpectedly, it is even harder to deal with because we were not
allowed to properly prepare ourselves for his or her passing. In addition, when gun violence has
caused the unexpected death, you have the added emotions to deal with related to the fact that
someone killed your loved one.
There is obviously no clear answer to this controversy. And with that being said, there is
no way to please everyone with the gun laws. But to me, I believe that stricter background
checks and having less violent guns available to the public will solve a lot of our problems.
Stricter background checks will assure that the deadly weapons will be less likely to reach the
hands of those who should absolutely not have them. And not allowing civilians to own a gun of
mass destruction without proper training will also dramatically decrease incidences of mass
killings. With all of this being said, it is safe to say that the gun laws should be re-written to
insure the safety of Americans. There are too many innocent lives lost to the pull of a trigger.
Solving this problem before anyone else dies would mean the world to Kyle and Kylies mom.







Jacques 6

Works Cited
America's Gun: The Rise of the AR-15. Hulu. CNBC, n.d. Web. 24 February 2014.
"Anti-Gun Liberal News Anchor Gets Destroyed Repeatedly during Interview with Keith
Morgan."YouTube. YouTube, 14 Jan. 2013. Web. 24 February 2014.
"Are You Ready For Gun Control Debate Round 2?" YouTube. YouTube, 08 May 2013. Web.
24 February 2014.
"Proof - Founding Fathers Wanted Americans Armed." YouTube. YouTube, 23 Jan. 2013. Web.
24 February 2014.