On March 16th, a gunman killed eight people in Atlanta. Less than a week later, 10 people were killed in a mass shooting in Boulder, Colorado. Soon after, 8 more were killed in a shooting in Indianapolis. These are not freak events--The US experiences an average of 19 mass shootings per year, with an average of 10 people killed in each (Everytown For Gun Control). Over the years, this translates into hundreds dead, countless more wounded, and communities broken and traumatized. What causes this rampant gun violence? The US has virtually no restrictions on who can buy a gun. The lax laws that are in place do almost nothing and allow murderers to arm themselves. In order to protect American citizens and stop the senseless, normalized violence, the United States ought to ban assault weapons and institute strong background checks.

Assault weapons, guns that are designed to release as many bullets as possible in as little time as possible, should absolutely not be owned by civilians. When we examine the rates of death from shootings with these military-style weapons, it is clear that their only purpose is to inflict the maximum amount of harm possible. According to Everytown for Gun safety, the “deadliest mass shooting incidents in the US all involved the use of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines: Las Vegas, Orlando, Newtown, Sutherland Springs, and Parkland....Assault weapons are generally high-powered, semi automatic firearms designed to fire rounds at a greater velocity than most other firearms, and...they enable a shooter to fire a devastating number of rounds over a short period.” Mass shootings that involve assault weapons leave “six times as many people shot than when there [is] no assault weapon” (Everytown for Gun Safety). These weapons are specifically intended to inflict as much harm as possible in as little time as possible, making them the perfect tool for killers. Dozens of people could be dead before anyone could even pick up the phone to call 911.

Luckily, the solution is right in front of us--and supported by significant evidence: a ban on assault weapons. The Federal Assault Weapons Ban that was in place in the US from 1994 to 2004 “resulted in a significant decrease in public mass shootings, number of gun deaths, and number of gun injuries” (Paul). Banning assault weapons will significantly reduce the number of mass shootings and the casualties from them, as has been clearly illustrated by data. One of the main reasons that this ban was not extended is because conservatives tend to be outraged at the supposed breach of their second amendment right to bear arms. However, an assault weapons ban is entirely constitutional. The right to bear arms is not unconditional--there are certain types of weapons that citizens are not allowed to own because of their immense destructive power--like nuclear or chemical weapons. Military rifles should be included in that category. The government ought to be more invested in protecting its citizens' right to life than the right to own an automatic rifle. 

In addition, there need to be far more stringent background checks before gun purchases. In the US, people who are so unhinged that they plan to commit murder often buy their guns legally. The shooters in some of the most well known mass shootings were able to walk into a store and buy the guns they used to commit mass murder without an issue. Background checks will solve this horrifying problem. According to experts,  “The most promising option is a national...policy requiring people to obtain a permit, contingent on passing a background check, before buying a firearm...The type of firearm policy most consistently associated with curtailing the diversion of guns to criminals...is [a permit to purchase requirement] for handguns.” 

Some argue that background checks and other gun control measures just take guns away from people who will use them for good. However, the logic here is flawed for two reasons: background checks will make it more difficult for criminals and mentally unstable people to buy guns legally, which will significantly decrease their ability to cause violence in the first place. This means that it will not be necessary for good citizens to step in. And second, background checks will not stop anyone who is mentally fit to own a gun. If these concerned citizens are as law abiding as they claim to be, then they should not have an issue with strong background checks. The only ones who will be affected are those who plan to harm themselves or others.

In other developed countries, mass shooting events have led to immediate and sweeping gun control measures. So why is the US dragging its feet? Our country is a place that is supposed to be free, so there is no reason that citizens should fear being caught in a mass shooting when they go out in public. The solution is right in front of us. Gun control works, and the US government has an obligation to protect its citizens.

Works cited--

“Mass Shootings in America.” Everytown Research & Policy, 8 Apr. 2021, everytownresearch.org/maps/mass-shootings-in-america-2009-2019/. 

Paul, Marla. “Assault Weapon Ban Significantly Reduces Mass Shooting.” Phys.org, Phys.org, 30 Mar. 2021, phys.org/news/2021-03-assault-weapon-significantly-mass.html. 

Sargent, Greg. “Why Expanding Background Checks Would, in Fact, Reduce Gun Crime.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 22 Apr. 2019, www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/04/03/why-expanding-background-checks-would-in-fact-reduce-gun-crime/.

DeFilippis, Evan, and Devin Hughes. “Three Common-Sense Gun Policies That Would Save Lives.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 15 Oct. 2015, www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/three-common-sense-gun-policies-that-would-save-lives/2015/10/15/3fd8cb80-735f-11e5-9cbb-790369643cf9_story.html.

Victor, Daniel, and Jenny Gross. “A List of Recent Mass Shootings in the United States.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 23 Mar. 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/03/23/us/us-mass-shootings.html.

.