While gun control advocates continue pushing for a ban on guns, many fail to realize that all it would do is make the problem worse.

Now, don’t come after me for not caring about putting an end to the disturbing series of shootings that has recently begun (and unfortunately, has probably not ended yet). In fact, I feel just as determined to make a change as the ones protesting for the laws to be put in place.

However, a gun ban is nowhere near the way to go. Adam Winkler of latimes.com wrote, “Worse, the bans may make it harder to enact more effective gun control laws.”

Unfortunately, something as simple as just banning the production of guns would never be effective in a society that is so divided with half of the people gagging at the sight of a gun, and the other half throwing around the phrase “IT’S MY SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT” every chance they get.

Besides, does anyone really think illegalizing anything stops criminals from finding a way past it? Making killing illegal has never stopped any shootings, so why would taking it just a small step further stop them?

Thomas Bentley of thetimesnews.com wrote, “Banning guns will favor the criminals, by taking advantage of innocent victims.”

A law-abiding citizen will give up a gun if ever required, long before a criminal with nothing but massacre on his mind. Every Outlaw WILL find a way. As a result of that, any honest citizen would have nothing to defend his/her family when faced with an armed attacker.

Ronald Suchy is the instructor of Information Technology and Programming at MHS who believes every honorable citizen deserves the right to own a gun. He said, “Legal bans only affect law-abiding citizens. Criminals are outlaws and by their nature will not follow the law.”

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying no adjustment should be made. I am well aware that revisions NEED to be made in order to avoid future attacks. However, the problem may not lie solely on the gun held in the attacker’s hands.

Suchy said, “As our society changes, a more active role in security is needed.”

Following the Las Vegas mass shooting, Kevin Johnson and Rick Jervis of usatoday.com wrote, “Stephen Paddock, the man whose Las Vegas shooting rampage killed 58 people and left more than 500 injured, bought 33 guns in the past year, a law enforcement official said Wednesday.”

I can’t tell what baffles me more: The carelessness of the security that allowed an armed man access to the hotel he attacked from, or the amount of firearms he was able to purchase in a year. A year.
You can’t tell me a gun ban would have prevented this from happening more effectively than stronger security.

All a ban on guns would accomplish in the end is a less safe environment for those that choose to follow the law, and an easier environment for those who choose to commit such heinous crimes. Suchy said, “I see no benefits to banning guns as a whole, any population unable to defend itself will eventually fall to tyranny.”