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

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

Yearning for Democracy: Tiananmen's Legacy

"Wearing a simple white shirt, dark pants, and carrying two shopping bags," he blocked a column of a Chinese military tank (Dunleavy). The Tank Man, known as the "Unknown Rebel," emerged into the global media spotlight after the violent crackdown (Iyer). This incident was a series of protests in Beijing, China, 1989, led by "university students, intellectuals, and workers" (Ray). These demonstrations aimed to seek "democratic, political, social, economic and other reforms" and garnered widespread global attention (The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica). The protests escalated from a scale of "100,000" students to "1 million" people participating (The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica). Ultimately, the tragic incident culminated in "Chinese soldiers and police storming Tiananmen Square, firing live rounds into the crowd" (History.com Editors), resulting in "hundreds to thousands of protesters being killed&quo

Suppression and Control: The Loss of Human Rights and Press Freedom in Modern China

In today's China, freedom of speech no longer exists, and the situation is getting worse. Whether you shout protest slogans on the street or post "sensitive" comments on the internet, you may face severe sanctions, or even be sent to prison. This is the reality of modern China, a country without human rights and without press freedom. Image source: U.S. Department of State's " China's Disregard for Human Rights " In this country, all news is controlled by the authorities, and every news item is filtered and reviewed. The media dare not report the truth and can only publish government-approved speeches. This situation is very frightening and helpless. We have lost our freedom and our choices and can only accept the information that is being fed to us, becoming passive listeners. What is even more disturbing is that the Chinese government uses technology to monitor and restrict people. In the era of the Internet, people can express their opinions and ideas

Independent Thinking

Search This Blog