Why Imposing More Gun Control Measures is Not the Solution

First, I would like to express my condolences to those who have died from gun violence. According to the statistics, in 2021, approximately 20,000 people died from gun violence in the United States. Yes, 20,000, and this number is on the rise in 2022. However, these numbers did not shock me. Because in 2021, 39,000 people died in car accidents in the United States, while over 71,000 people died from overdosing on synthetic opioid drugs, mainly fentanyl, and the main source of fentanyl is China. In January 2023, the United States also experienced four shooting incidents in 4 days, resulting in 22 deaths from gun violence. At that time, I was already considering whether the government should pass more gun control measures, and my answer was no, because, as the Second Amendment states, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Therefore, when the Second Amendment was written, the right to bear arms was seen as a means to defend the nation's freedom, and the well-regulated militia mentioned in the Second Amendment was seen as a crucial factor in defeating the British Empire. The right to bear arms was enshrined in the Constitution to resist tyranny and defend the nation. I have also been thinking about why in the 240 years since its founding, the United States has not experienced the same kind of police abuse of power and unconditional intrusion into people's homes by any public officials as I have witnessed in communist China. Is the reason related to the right to bear arms? The answer is yes because it has helped law enforcement agencies in the United States to uphold the law.

Gun violence is a problem, but it is not the vast problem or disaster that the US is currently facing compared to deaths caused by fentanyl and the Covid-19 virus. However, the impact of gun violence on public opinion is strong, and some are using it to amplify the issue and bring it to the attention of the majority.

So, the US cannot impose more legal restrictions on firearms. If strict bans or more restrictions are imposed to control guns, the more significant result would be that good people will not be able to get guns, while bad people will always find ways to get more guns. If we want to defend national freedom and stop bad guys or tyranny, this is the price we must pay. We don't have to focus on guns because guns won't kill people unless someone pulls the trigger. Banning guns won't solve the problem of people, and if people are bad, they will kill more people with knives or cars. We must improve people's morality and faith, and American values. This is the fundamental solution.

Comments

The Double-Edged Sword of Social Media Connection and Isolation

I come from a country where freedom of speech is restricted. I remember when I first registered my Twitter account in 2017, it felt like opening a new world. Indeed, at that time, I fully experienced the allure of free speech; social media became a favorable place for me to express my political views. Because the topics I am interested in cannot be discussed on China's "intranet," I became engrossed in Twitter, spending significant time daily sharing my thoughts and opinions. However, I found that over time, a sense of isolation from my relatives and colleagues in real life began to develop. Firstly, the primary reason for this isolation was that the topics we focused on were no longer the same. My relatives and friends enjoyed their peaceful lives, discussing topics like cuisine, housing, cars, and children's education. Meanwhile, on Twitter, I was exposed to content I had never seen before in my life. I learned about massacres committed by the authorities against th...

Should TikTok Be Banned?

“Your platform should be banned,” said Congresswoman Cathy Rodgers, setting the stage for the marathon five-hour-long Congressional hearing (“America May Be a Step Closer”). On March 23, 2023, TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew faced questioning from Congress members, with intelligence and legislative bodies from the Biden administration expressing fears that the Chinese government might weaponize American app-usage data. This situation was not the first time TikTok found itself in such a predicament (Perrigo). In 2020, then-President of the United States, Donald Trump, utilized the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to issue an executive order that required TikTok to stop operations in the United States because of national security concerns (“United States Pursues Regulatory Actions”). In response, TikTok filed a lawsuit against the American courts and secured a preliminary injunction against the executive order (“United States Pursues Regulatory Actions”). Despite granting TikT...

Reflections on 'The Social Dilemma'

I was pleased to see so many former top employees of tech giants expressing their pessimistic views on today's social media and giving warnings to the world in this documentary. This is an excellent documentary shot in 2020, but four years later, such a "dilemma" has not been solved and is even more serious. Firstly, the documentary raised the issue of phone addiction, which I can refer to as "artificially created opium." The goal of software operators is to get users addicted to increase user retention time. The "culprit" here is the online advertising model. Rather than saying social media provides feeds for you to get more of the information you want, it's more accurate to say that the time users waste on social media is the real "feed" for platforms or vested interests, enabling them to earn more income. Secondly, why are users addicted to different types of social media? The documentary also mentions artificial ...

Independent Thinking

Search This Blog