Uvalde Texas Massacre: Policy Changes Needed


I have always been a strong supporter of the second amendment. I believe in it as much for the symbolism as for what it actually states. Two important points need to be made regarding Amendment 2. First, the second amendment is in fact second, if one believes that the first 10 amendments or Bill of Rights were listed in order of importance. Amendment 1, exclaiming freedom of speech, assembly and press, are the most important rights in a Democracy. Second, only autocracies forbid citizens from owning firearms, for obvious reasons. That doesn’t mean, there shouldn’t be common sense reform, which I will propose and support.

The Uvalde school shooter is very different from the shooter in Buffalo, who was a white supremacist and racially motivated. This clearly was not racially motivated. There is in fact no evidence as to why this person decided to shoot up Robb Elementary school. It may never be known. What we do know is this massacre was perpetrated by a deranged individual, who earlier in the day, shot his grandmother, with whom he lived, according to reports. On further examination, there were clear warning signs that he was a threat. We know this because he was apparently bullied, a loner, and from statements he made on social media. Someone should have said or done something to prevent this.

We have experienced too many of these mass shootings and changes need to be made to avoid the next inevitable tragedy. As a gun rights advocate, I feel it is my duty to speak out for the following reforms. First, more stringent background checks are necessary. Having to wait a few days or even a few weeks, does not violate second amendment protections. It may be an inconvenience, but really not a big deal. Second, I propose that no one, under the age of 23, be able to purchase a firearm. No exceptions!! Young people often make stupid decisions. Their brains and ability to reason are not yet fully developed and therefore, firearms and access to firearms, should be tightly monitored and restricted. Third, limit the size of the magazines. There is no justifiable reason why anyone would need large capacity magazines. Ten or fifteen rounds would make it far more difficult for shooters to inflict such heavy casualties. These initiatives are not unfair or violate the Constitution in any way. They’re just common-sense initiatives, not a slippery slope.

I am not suggesting the banning of AR15’s or any similar firearms, as many on the left are suggesting, merely tighter restrictions on their use. Regarding the AR15, something that is intentionally distorted by the media, needs to be addressed. The AR in AR15 has nothing to do with the type of weapon. The AR stands for ArmaLite, the manufacturer of the weapon. Those who would like to ban them, try to dictate the narrative by using the scary AR designation suggesting it means (Automatic Rifle or Assault Rifle. That is not the case. I have fired AR-15s and they are excellent firearms and fun to shoot. Would I own one? Not in New York City but if I lived in a rural part of the state or country, perhaps.

To those who are unfamiliar with firearms or who have never fired even a revolver, fear is understandable. However, in many states in the Union, entire families show up to the range to fire their rifles and sidearms. It’s a family activity that everyone enjoys. I don’t expect big city dwellers to understand it or accept it, but simply to understand the reality. It’s no different from people living in rural communities, not understanding how people in the big cities live in such confined spaces, with rats running around the subway. It speaks to the largest problem in our country today. People speak at each other, not to each other. It’s all about who is right and who is wrong. Negotiations aren’t possible if both sides have that mindset. Our Congress reflects that unfortunately, which is why very little is accomplished.

We must not let this moment pass without making significant changes. I support the notion that people are responsible, not the weapons. But these weapons clearly make it easier to kill more people. That’s just a fact that no one can deny. We need to be more vigilant with profiling those who may be a danger to others. Human being’s ability to sense danger, is one of our greatest defenses. We don’t have sharp teeth or claws; we have our senses. When someone is a loner, a misfit, young, and tries to purchase a firearm and hundreds of rounds of ammunition, that should be a red flag.

I fully understand the contentiousness of this issue. In a perfect world, humans would eliminate all weapons and people would be able to reasonably work out their differences by talking and negotiating. But we’re still not there yet and never have been. Men are no different from animals, we simply have more evolved brains and were able to use our resources to develop weapons to control each other and to take what we want by force. It’s sad but true. That doesn’t mean we can’t or shouldn’t try to make a better future. Congress can absolutely make some commonsense changes without taking away people’s firearms or violating the Constitution. Will that ever happen? Perhaps, but not with the politicians that currently sit in Congress. Hopefully our children and grandchildren will do better.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s