I'm consolidating many of the popular arguments because when analyzed for their underlying principles, they are mostly the same.1). Assault (Style) weapons should be banned.
In order to determine whether the above statement is true, we're going to have to understand collectively what an "Assault (Style) weapon is". While determining the qualifications for such a classification, I've come across multiple references with varying
degrees of similarity
. What seems to correlate between the qualifications for an "Assault Rifle" is that the firearm itself must have been manufactured with selective firing modes and of those modes "Automatic" and "Semi-Automatic" must be included. In layman's terms this means that if I open the packaging of an "Assault Rifle", I can toggle a lever or switch on the rifle itself that allows it to be fired as either an automatic weapon (Like a Machine Gun) or a semi-automatic weapon (Exactly like a handgun).
Now that I've established what an "Assault Rifle" is, we can move forward with determining whether or not they should be banned. Or I should say that we "Could" move forward with the determination if it weren't for the fact that Assault Rifles were banned in 1994 under the provisions of The Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act
. I suppose we could discuss after the fact whether or not it was the right move for the United States but the rationale of the argument that these weapons should be banned seems to be that they're somehow not
I'm going to move into some dangerous territory here and presume that the argument above isn't what people actually mean when they say it. Let's presume that what's actually being argued is that:2). Firearms that look like Assault Rifles should be banned.
I strongly feel that I can adequately squash this argument by suggesting that it's irrational to insist that the appearance of a firearm (The aesthetics) could somehow make it more or even less dangerous than any other firearm. Since the appearance has nothing to do with how the weapon functions and has zero impact on the weapon's performance then I'm going to go ahead and lay this one to rest. Feel free to present a rational argument on this if you'd like though.3). Stricter gun control laws need to be implemented to prevent people from obtaining Firearms with intent to do harm.
Now we're getting into the rational arguments for the "Anti-gun" side if you will. As many of us would likely agree, there does in fact need to be a fully effective system in place to prevent say a career criminal from walking into a gun store and purchasing a firearm. I doubt many would contest this idea, instead what most "Pro-gun" activists, if you will, are against is the implementation of this idea by the same people who are responsible for arguments one
For example:John and Courtney (Husband and Wife) are attending the local PTA meeting at their Children's school one night. During the meeting, the Principle announces that several new and exciting programs are being implemented to bring about safety and security for their Children while attending School during the School day. The Principal announces that effective immediately, violence will be banned at the school. John and Courtney are confused, understanding that violence in school is already against the rules and also punishable by law...they're uncertain how that would deter anyone from behaving violently. The Principal calms all the parents down by clarifying that "That's not all", his new program would also require that Children who even appear to be capable of violence shall be expelled effective immediately in order to prevent violence from occurring. That sent John and Courtney reeling and they both protested adamantly that an attempt to classify children as "Potentially" violent would arbitrarily exclude Children from School who by any standards are no more capable of violence than other Children. The principal wound down his speech and explained that in addition to his two new policies, he would immediately begin an in-depth screening of Children who register at the school and the screening would cover background information to include: History of violence, criminal background, mental disorders and Family medical history. At this point John and Courtney are both in agreement that a background screening sounds like a positive action to ensure the safety of their Children...but neither of them are confident that the same person who suggested that banning violence or expelling students for appearing to be capable of violence, would be fit to implement a background check program for students. John and Courtney are sufficiently turned off to the ideas of the Principal at this point and are both ready to see the District Superintendent about the competency of the Principal at their Children's School.
The point here is that while the third
argument might be based in rational logic, it's being made from the same side that's proposing one
. It's merely my opinion but I'm of the strong influence that Pro-gun activists are largely opposed to just about any discussion of Gun Control but that's mostly because of the insanity that comes from their opposition. Likewise I'm sure there are "Gun nuts" out there who sufficiently scare Anti-gun activists into their delusional fears of random NRA members shooting up their local schools...although to date I can't think of a single NRA member who's done that.
In the end I don't think that there needs to be stricter gun control laws, I think the laws that are in place are sufficient...they just need to be enforced. If and when a criminal purchases a firearm legally, the system has failed, so let's fix the system. Now it's common knowledge
that the overwhelming majority of crimes committed with firearms are done so with illegally obtained
firearms, but if the majority of Americans want to focus on the less than 20% of the issue first...well we can go there. I suspect that even if we did manage to close the loop entirely on gun sales...crimes committed with Firearms wouldn't decrease...not in the least. But hey at least everyone will get a warm and fuzzy feeling about making a positive change...even if it doesn't stop murderers from killing Children.