It was a late, cool night on Sunday, October 2nd. The Route 91 Harvest Festival was in full swing, and main act Jason Aldean was partway through his set when shots were fired from the Mandalay Bay Resort. Countless were injured, and this shooting would go down as the worst in U.S History. The only question people are left asking is: Will anything change?

Of course not.

Since the Sandy Hook shooting in 2012, there have been more than 1,500 mass shootings in America alone, and the overwhelming response is to simply show your support online with the phrase “Pray for *insert place*.” The common response after a mass shooting is to buy a gun. This signals that many feel that they can protect themselves if a shooting occurred in their life. Another response is to argue for stricter gun laws, but most of the time the lense shifts after a week or two, leaving these tragedies to fall into the void never to be seen again.

Even if there was a constant overwhelming force pressuring Congress into making new gun laws, the National Rifle Association could simply pay off the legislators to reject bills that would cause them harm. Many Republicans have a history of being in the NRA’s pocket, receiving donations in exchange for their support (Senator John McCain received over seven million dollars in campaign and personal funds.) Being in the pocket of the NRA makes these Senators vote against gun restrictions even if their own opinion think otherwise. If a Senator backed by the NRA votes the other way, they will most certainly lose many millions of dollars in campaign funding, almost assuring they won’t be reelected. This poses a problem. Due to the Republican majority in the House and the Senate, the likelihood of passing a gun bill is small.

There was a segment on 60 Minutes a few years ago where they send a 16 year old boy to go try and purchase cigarettes, alcohol, and lottery tickets. He is turned down for all three, but when they send him to a gun show, he is able to walk out with an automatic rifle and about a hundred rounds of ammunition in less than five minutes. Personally it’s mind boggling to think about how this is possible. We as a country are able to go to extreme lengths to vet incoming immigrants to make sure they aren’t criminals, but can’t vet ourselves?

However, there may be a solution. In the early to late 80s, there was a large push to demonize tobacco; hundreds of commercials, infographics, interviews, news stories, and scientific studies were pumped through the American household. The tobacco companies lobbied and lobbied but the campaign succeeded: U.S consumption of cigarettes has declined by over 100 billion packs in the past decade, and is projected to decrease even more in the future. Although I don’t think demonizing guns is a way to get laws passed, something similar could work. Since the gun industry panders to a large portion of the population, limiting gun purchases to only allow people to buy say one to two per person (after they have had a background check done) could limit shootings to a minimum.

Recently, the main focus of gun regulations have been focused around bump stocks. These stocks allowed Stephen Paddock’s single shot rifles to turn into automatic weapons. The NRA has come out and said they are open to talks about new regulations regarding bump stocks, which is most definitely a step in the right direction.

There is still much to be done if we want to eliminate mass shootings in our country, and it will take time to get people to change. While I am not opposed to people having guns, stockpiling tens or hundreds of rifles is just plain unnecessary. At this point, we are just waiting for the next shooting to happen, until we have senators who want to achieve action regardless of jobs and dollar signs, all we can do is wait.

Gun control is a heated issue that has yet to be resolved. With both sides constantly going against each other, it can be hard to find what place you belong in in this whole thing.

Being a gun owner myself, I tend to get a lot of negative feedback. You will hear and see a lot of things in mainstream media about things like “mass shootings” and how “assault rifles” cause mass death and destruction. These claims tend to have little to no evidence backing them and exploit fear in people to get them to vote against guns. This tends to lead people to look down on those who are exercising their Second Amendment right to own guns.

The term “mass shooting” is not officially defined, meaning quarrels that consist of more than two people with few to no deaths involved are getting mixed in with incidents like the Las Vegas shooting. This not only represents information inaccurately, but also make it seem like guns do a lot more mass harm than they actually do.

Another thing you’ll hear is that “guns kill people.” This statement is horribly inaccurate. Yes, people use guns to kill other people, but guns themselves cannot kill. It is almost impossible for a gun to discharge without human intervention.  

Contrary to popular belief, advocates against gun control have common sense and are willing to listen and compromise. For example, the Las Vegas shooter used a kit to convert his semi-automatic weapon to an almost fully automatic one. I personally am against kits like this and certain other things that are meant to cause harm and wrong-doing. However, taking all guns or a large portion of them isn’t the answer.

In March of 2017, in Oklahoma, three armed teenagers broke into a house. The homeowner’s son was home with his father when the break-in occurred. The son of the homeowner shot and killed all three teenagers with his AR-15. Had that son not had access to a gun, the family would have been left defenseless.

Gun control is not only negative now, but opens up opportunity for future incidents. A good number of mass shootings happen in public areas and “gun-free zones.” It makes sense that a shooter would target an area with little to no resistance, so arming law-abiding citizens reduces the chance of a mass shooting. If people are willing to commit mass murder, they are willing to illegally purchase a gun. Gun control laws will not help prevent mass shootings. In fact, they will simply make it more difficult for regular citizens to obtain guns and potentially save lives.

A few years ago, an Uber driver with a concealed-carry permit stopped a potential mass shooting. The driver (who wasn’t named for privacy reasons) was sitting in his car when he witnessed a gunman opening fire in a public area. He responded by pulling out a gun and shooting the man repeatedly. He injured only the gunman and no one else. This is just one example of a civilian acting ethically and bravely to stop mass violence, and he was able to do so because he had a weapon provided to him legally. If gun control were more strict, the driver would not have been able to defend himself and other innocent people.

We have the Second Amendment for a reason: to protect our ability to defend ourselves. The right response to outside threats is not to get rid of our defenses. While there are common-sense measures, gun control doesn’t solve the problems it tries to address. It only hurts ordinary people. For that reason, I am against gun control.