On Sunday, October 1st, 2017, retired accountant Stephen Paddock killed fifty-eight concertgoers and injured 500 others in the most lethal mass shooting in American history. Investigations revealed that Paddock had amassed 23 assault rifles in his hotel room, 47 firearms total, and thousands of rounds of ammunition in his car.
There are a lot of questions that have yet to be answered. For many, the most troubling of all is the mystery surrounding Paddock’s motivation behind his heinous actions—or lack thereof.
But for me, the most evident question is this: Why is it legal for a civilian to own so much dangerous weaponry? In what scenario would any civilian ever need to possess that many firearms?
America has the highest per capita gun injury in the world, and it also holds the title for the highest number of mass shootings in global history. As the 273rd mass shooting of 2017, the Las Vegas massacre only reinforces these superlatives—and it’s disturbing how desensitized some Americans have become to such headlines.
According to CNN, 31% of all mass shootings occur in the United States, despite representing only 5% of the world’s population. It’s an epidemic, and yet few gun control restrictions have been enacted. My question—and it’s one that I haven’t been able to figure out for years—is why? Why won’t our government react to something that clearly demands government attention?
In 1996, the first mass shooting in Australia left 35 dead. It’s a sizably smaller toll than America’s recent massacres, but this immediately spurred Australian legislation to impose stricter gun laws. Similar to the United States, Australia is also a country that had traditionally high gun ownership rates—yet Australia reacted immediately. Conversely, in the United States, people are still telling each other that it’s not time to act; rather, it’s time to pray and heal–as if the two are mutually exclusive.
Perhaps my issue is that I’ve never touched a gun. Admittedly, it’s a little hard to understand why people would love something that I’ve never encountered before. Even so, I’d like to think—although one can never be sure—that in light of recent events, we would still advocate for stricter gun laws.
Regardless of one’s familiarity with guns, there are irrefutable statistics showing that guns actually endanger their owners more than they protect them. A homeowner is over four times more likely to be killed if they own a gun. A woman’s likelihood of being shot and killed by a husband or ex-partner is five times greater than her chances of being murdered by male strangers. And in total, civilians have 79 times the number of guns that cops do.
If law enforcement doesn’t need that many firearms, neither should we. Check out this Mother Jones article for more busted gun myths.
0
0
Average Rating