In the wake of the most recent school shooting two distinct groups formed (they already existed but their lines became more apparent). One side responds with a focus on the tool used in the shooting. Yes, they discuss other factors but the tool seems to be the easy focus.
That response instigated a counter and defensive response also focusing on the tool from the other side.
So much effort is focused on the tool. The tool didn’t plan the violence. The tool did not break the law. A person killed others. A person planned the violence. A person broke the law.
I said the easy target is the tool – the gun. The difficult topic to address is the person who caused this violence. Now that the incident is over he can be charged, tried, and judged. What about events leading up to the horrible acts? This is the real debate.
If this is deemed a mental health issue, how far can we go before we begin to violate the rights of people who are no threats to others? What is mentally ill and what is considered normal? Our system revolves around on our freedoms’ ending at the point where our actions negatively affect another person (to a point). How do we intercept people intending to do harm? Will the United States create a Pre-Cog enforcement branch (see Minority Report), swoop down and save the day?
School shootings (or any mass casualty event) are terroristic – can the instigators/shooters be profiled as terrorists before the event occurs and be tried for conspiracy or terrorism?
We have another issue that needs addressing. We are a nation of laws and both sides above have an expectation of laws to both be followed and enforced. This expectation is the basis of our civilization and culture.
Currently there are laws in place where people deemed unfit to possess firearms due to criminal action are to be charged for possession or attempt to purchase a firearm. Reports say this isn’t occurring. Remember that guy in Texas that shot up a church? He was a restricted person. He should not have had access to firearms – his restricted status never was added into the system. So, he was able to buy firearms and no cautions came up on his background check. Who is held responsible for that negligent dereliction of duty? Lives were lost.
What’s worse – violent offenders with gun charges are being cut loose in areas with the strictest gun laws. That puzzles me.
Further gun control isn’t the answer. More laws aren’t the answer. Our existing laws cover our needs. It seems our issues aren’t right versus left or pro-gun versus anti-gun, the issues are with people and an existing system that needs to be held accountable.