Obama misses key points in gun orders
Published: Wednesday, January 30, 2013
Updated: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 11:01
President Obama, along with Vice-President Biden, held a press conference and announced 23 executive actions on gun control. Some of the main details of those actions were to ban assault weapons or military style weapons, a ban on clips over the 10 round capacity, more background checks and funding for the CDC to research mental diseases and disorders that might cause someone to plan and execute a mass shooting.
In my mind, there are some questions that I have had and thought about when reading these 23 actions. If assault weapons occur in less than one percent of gun crimes, why is President Obama not trying to take away handguns, which make up over 95 percent of gun crimes? In my opinion, there are more individual gun crimes committed that end in fatalities than those in mass shootings. More people are killed in gun crimes with the use of handguns than that of assault weapons. This information can be found in the article named “Gun Rhetoric vs. Gun Facts” on FactCheck.org.
Next, I disagree with the ban of clips of 10 rounds or more. Most of the weapons that have been used in these mass shootings have been used with big clips, but with semi-automatic weapons. That means one trigger pull equals one round shot. This is the system that happens in handguns as well. I don’t understand why the government would confiscate weapons and clips that occur in less than one percent of gun crimes.
Next, I do agree with the increase in quality and quantity of background checks that will occur. The President was right that we should check for people with criminal backgrounds, mental disorder backgrounds or any type of person who has physical or social issues before we let them purchase a gun. As these shootings occur, more and more information is discovered that these gunmen have had mental issues or criminal backgrounds. These instances could have been avoided.
This leads me to my next point. I do not think that researching with the CDC, like the President is planning, is something that can prevent these massacres from happening. Most people could agree that the system is what failed many victims. Most of the doctors and judiciary officials have released or known of issues that these gunmen had long before the shootings happened. Doing a little bit of extra work with the patients would show that they are not ready to be released back in the public and should be put into medical surveillance. An example of this is James Holmes, the shooter in Aurora. A psychologist reported that Holmes was very unstable and that he could do something. Did he expect a mass shooting could happen? I am sure he didn’t. However, it was something that he should have reported, in my opinion. I think if this extra work were put in, it would benefit the public more than funding research. We are in a tough time in our economy. I think that we should not spend more money to research something that can be taken care of by people putting in a little bit more work.
In conclusion, these tragedies are horrible and sad. It is unbearable to think that we, as Americans, have a little bit of fear anytime we go out in public. I feel that something should be done on the gun control situation, but I feel that the President’s way is the wrong one. I think gun control should be done at a state level because regulations in Tennessee should and are going to be different than that of Maryland. According to FactCheck.org, the majority of guns possessed are in the South. Ironically, the fewest mass shootings occur in the South. This has been a recurring statistic on shows, such as CNN’s Piers Morgan Tonight and Fox’s Bill O’Reilly. In addition, there are more instances of civilians who carried concealed weapons stopping gunmen from killing innocent lives. I think that when law enforcement officials across the nation say they will not enforce a gun ban that they feel is unconstitutional, it can cause more conflict. I believe that banning guns will result in more and more violence and more shootings. In my opinion, we are not attacking an area where too many lives are lost in gun-free zones and are attacking the places where guns are allowed and many lives are saved.