The Guns and America series is special to Kingdom in the Midst. It is offered in hopes to raise the level of dialogue in the gun debate, to help people start talking to each other rather than past each other. Parts 1-4 are “Guest Posts.” Read Part 2 of the Guns and America series, Tougher gun laws will not nullify the Second Amendment. Read Part 3 of Guns and America series: Reasonable gun control starts with domestic abusers. Read Part 4 of Guns and America series: The right to bear arms shall not be infringed.
I encourage you to share these posts on your social media channels to further the discussion.
Let me first say I am as heartbroken and angry about what happened in Parkland (and Las Vegas, Sutherland Springs, etc.) as everyone else. The emotions resulting from the tragedy in Parkland are the same and genuine on both sides, and both sides usually agree that the causes and solutions are multifactorial and complex.
Where the sides differ is their opinions on the cause or causes and some of the solutions for these events. Unfortunately, the hurt, sadness, and anger at the senselessness of the tragedy are almost immediately overwhelmed by an even deeper anger and resentment when it comes to our differences regarding the causes and solutions.
I don’t ignore my emotions, but neither do I let them rule the issue. I am a realist by nature, so I study the issues. Yes, I have my biases; but, I don’t come by them without great thought and study nor do I hold to them regardless of the facts presented. As I was specifically asked my opinion on gun control, my point of view comes from studying the Second Amendment and relevant statistics, as well as my study and observation of human nature. Here are the five main reasons I believe additional gun control legislation is not the answer.
1. The Second Amendment
One need only study the additional writings of the Founders to understand their uncompromising belief that to keep and bear arms is a fundamental individual right. Any argument that the Constitution does not or should not apply today because the Founders didn’t foresee the weapons we have today is itself shortsighted. We don’t say that about any other rights. I don’t know who said it first, but based on my study of the Constitution, he or she was right: “The Constitution wasn’t written for its time, but to stand the test of time.” And such a position completely ignores the Founders’ belief that an armed populace is necessary to preserve the republic.
2. Guns
No one knows the exact number, but estimates put the number of guns in the U.S. at well over 300 million. Several estimates say there are more guns than people, even though only about 1/6 of the population actually owns guns. Specifically, there are already over 3 million ARs (the gun that receives the most attention) legally owned in the U.S.; but all semi-automatic rifles are magazine-fed, so the number of firearms with the same capability as the AR is estimated at another 97 million.
3. Statistics
While every unnatural death regardless of cause is tragic (accidents, overdose, medical error, crime, etc.), from a statistical standpoint, being murdered by a gun is not where the greatest danger lies. Per FBI statistics, in 2016 there were 11,044 murders committed with firearms (374 of those were with rifles of all types). That’s compared with 10,497 people killed by drunk drivers (NHTSA), more than 42,000 that overdosed on opioids (CDC), and an estimated 250,000 that died due to preventable medical errors (Johns Hopkins study). In a country where 2,744,248 U.S. residents died, homicides by gun accounted for 0.4% of all deaths.
When it comes to mass shootings, this number varies depending on who is defining “mass shooting.” The FBI defines a mass shooting as one where 3 or more people are killed. This leaves out a lot of incidences (e.g., 1 killed, but 2 wounded). At the other end, the Mass Shooting Tracker (MST) includes any incident where four or more people were shot. This includes wounded as well as killed, and it also includes the shooter if he took his own life (putting it at the high end). Neither account for the situation (public place vs. private home, indiscriminate [Las Vegas] vs. targeted [family annihilator]). According to MST, 606 people died in mass shootings in 2016. Going with this (likely) number, mass shootings accounted for 5% of all gun deaths, or 0.02% of all deaths.
Stats on guns used in self-defense vary widely, with the low end of “tens of thousands” to the high of 2.5 million defensive uses annually. Given the FBI’s 2016 statistics show 315,007 armed robberies and aggravated assaults in which guns were used by the perpetrator (I couldn’t find a stat for rapes where a gun was used by the offender), the low end isn’t hard to believe.
4. Current Laws
There are already gun laws on the books that are reasonable and the NICS is a fairly effective and timely process. Together, the laws and NICS should have prevented many of the past mass shootings. But the laws and NICS are only as effective as the other systems allow them to be. If laws are broken but the perpetrators are not prosecuted, what good are the laws? If a NICS check fails to turn up disqualifying information because a state or other responsible entity failed to upload the information to the databases used by NICS, what is the point of NICS? What good is it to add additional laws that will only burden the current system more and that only law-abiding citizens will follow?
5. Bad Guys
No one can deny there are bad guys out there. And unfortunately there always will be. Given the number of crimes committed with guns, it’s obvious the bad guys don’t follow the law. And no amount of laws will control them because bad guys don’t obey the law. That doesn’t mean don’t try to understand the variables that contribute to these evil acts. By all means, if we can implement any programs that identify these guys before they commit an atrocious act or programs that prevent them from ever thinking about it, we must do so. But we also must always realize no program or programs will stop all the evil around us.
So pulling it all together: the Second Amendment guarantees us each the right to defend ourselves from the evil people that exist (and a tyrannical government). And given the vast number of legally owned guns in this country compared against the relatively small number of murders by guns (again, I’m not trivializing or minimizing those deaths—they are and always will be tragic—it’s about perspective), and the fact guns are used for self-defense tens of thousands of times per year (preventing who knows how many murders), it completely defies logic to want to pass laws that deny law-abiding citizens who have committed no crimes their constitutionally protected right in order to prevent evil people who don’t obey laws from committing crimes.
Edie Edmondson retired from the Air Force after 22 years of service, and is currently an independent contractor. She lives in Colorado Springs with her husband of 25 years and her 17-year-old daughter.
