Mass shootings have become so normalized in America that many don’t even make the front page of the news anymore. No other high-income country in the world has even remotely the amount of gun violence that our nation faces every day (Gumas et al.). This horrifying issue has taken the lives of thousands of innocent Americans, and it comes down to whether constitutional rights or public safety are the country’s priority. The country's political state has made the issue exponentially worse. With each side swaying heavily to the opposite viewpoint, no solutions are being drawn. Many gun owners feel personally attacked by the thought of the government seizing weapons owned by civilians, but the issue isn’t all guns, just assault-style weapons. They are used increasingly because they allow the shooter to cause the most damage in a short time. Assault weapons have been used in 34% of all mass shootings since 2016, and each of those shootings has been the most lethal. Some may say the problem comes down to the person behind the gun, which may be true. Yet, when comparing the people that can be killed in 5 minutes by a man with a handgun and a man with an assault rifle, the answer is clear. These weapons are utilized by the military for a reason, and there is no need for a civilian to own one. Assault weapons need to be abolished in America to ensure public safety. No one should have to feel scared attending school, concerts, or even just the grocery store.
History of Assault Weapon Bans:
A ban on assault weapons has been executed before, and the decrease in deaths from mass shootings speaks for itself. From 1994 to 2004, the federal government placed a ban on the AR-15 and other assault-style weapons, which decreased gun violence by 25%. An interview titled “The U.S. Has Restricted Assault-Style Weapons Before. Did It Work?” between NPR correspondents Sarah McCammon and Eric Westervelt explains the effectiveness of this ban that former President Joe Biden helped implement. Westervelt pointed out loopholes in the law that made it hard for the government to keep these deadly weapons out of the hands of civilians. One of the most detrimental aspects was that the law permitted the purchase of other weapons similar to the AR-15, thereby undermining the ban's purpose. Although people were able to buy similar weapons legally when the ban was lifted in 2004, the increase in gun violence and deaths at the hands of guns rose significantly. John Donohue, a professor at Stanford University, is brought in and says, “So things are not only getting worse since the Federal Assault Weapons Ban ended, but they're getting worse faster” (qtd. in McCammon and Westervelt).
After the lifting of the ban, deaths at the hands of these guns have increased significantly, showing how deadly they are to the public. Similarly, a peer-reviewed journal by Dih-Dih Huang et al. looks at the decrease in gun deaths during the ban. A linear regression analysis was conducted and shows a notable decrease in deaths following the ban in some of the most dangerous cities. The statistic shows that from 1985 to 2014, firearm-related deaths per 1 million people decreased from 119.4 to 49.2 (Huang et al.). In other words, the number of people killed by firearms declined by more than half. That is significant, especially because the research was focused on Memphis, Houston, and Detroit, which are some of the most crime-ridden cities. Yet, the journal also mentions how the ban had lasting effects that could be seen by the slow rise in firearm deaths after it was lifted (Huang et al). The effectiveness of the Federal Assault Weapon Ban is clear, and the fact that the country has done it before shows that it is possible. Banning assault weapons is the easiest way to eradicate this entire problem.
Political Problems:
For this ban to be put into action, everyone needs to be on the same page. The country is facing some of the most divisive circumstances right now, which is making unity hard. Both political ends are very isolated from each other, and the right to own guns has become one of the most controversial issues between them. An article published in USA TODAY by Katherine Swartz demonstrates how close the votes were for a recent gun ban that passed in Congress in 2022. Swartz says, “The bill passed 217-213 along party lines - almost every Democrat in favor and almost every Republican against.” The fact that the votes on this matter were so close shows how divided the parties are. Swartz goes on to mention how the bill failed because Republicans did not vote with the Democrats on the matter.
Defending political ideologies has become more important to the government than critical thinking and making decisions that would better the country. It is infuriating to live under people in control with such pride that they won’t even try to understand both sides and just vote the way their peers do. It is also shocking how Republicans have not changed their minds on gun control in the United States with the recent attacks on President Donald Trump. In one of the most recent assassination attempts, an AR-15 rifle was even used to execute the plan. Chris Nesi highlights this in her New York Post article. The shooting killed a retired fire chief and left others severely wounded, including Trump (Nesi). The thing that stood out about the shooting was how the shooter was, in fact, a registered Republican. It shows that this issue goes far beyond political parties and assumed behavior. No side is more likely to commit these heinous acts than the other, and the presence of these weapons is a safety hazard for everyone involved. To make a real difference and to prevent the loss of thousands of Americans every year, our government needs to unite and pass this assault weapon ban.
Significant Mass Shootings:
School shootings have been some of the most detrimental to our country. Some of the most infamous include Sandy Hook Elementary School, Columbine High School, and Uvalde Elementary School. The article by Douglas Kellner details the shooting and attacks Texas for its easy access to firearms for all civilians. Kellner attacks Texas and its representatives for having little to no gun safety and having loose laws on purchasing firearms, which is why the Uvalde shooter was able to acquire the gun for the shooting. Kellner says, “...Texas and other states allow 18-year-olds to buy deadly assault rifles and walk into a school, church, mall, or public site and carry out a mass killing.” The most frustrating part about this is that this shooting would not have happened, and those precious lives would not have been lost if these weapons weren’t available for purchase to the public.
The right to own a gun is every American’s right, and that should not be taken away, but there is genuinely no need for any person not in the military to own a gun of that caliber. On the other hand, the academic journal written by Mark Gius depicts how shooters favor handguns in mass shootings. His research concludes that handguns are responsible for nearly 33% of mass shootings, while assault weapons are used in around 8.25%. Although this statistic shows that assault weapons aren’t used as much, they result in a higher average death toll per massacre. For example, Gius says, “The average number of fatalities per mass shooting during the assault ban period was 7.5; during the non-ban period, the average number of fatalities was 8.6.” Assault weapons can hold more ammunition than most other guns, which allows the shooter to have more opportunity to hurt more people. Gius also remarks on how there were fewer mass shootings during the period in which these guns were banned under the Federal Assault Weapon Ban (FAWB). Even if the numbers differ slightly, any change is better when it comes to the safety of those who live in the United States. Students should not feel scared going to school, and with assault weapons being banned, they won’t have to be.
Legal Obligations:
The reason the ban has not been successful in the past is that it, in theory, infringes on the constitutional rights of Americans. The Second Amendment, which grants every American citizen the right to bear arms, dates back to 1791. The amendment was initially implemented for militia groups during the American Revolution. Since then, people have used it to justify owning many major weapons in their homes for various reasons. As guns and mass shootings have become a normal part of American society, measures have been taken to make laws stricter about outlawing certain styles of guns. Don Thompson remarks on a California Judge overturning a state law about the ban on assault weapons in an article for The Associated Press. The U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez says, “[the ban] unlawfully deprives law-abiding Californians of weapons commonly allowed in most other states and by the U.S. Supreme Court” (Thompson). This argument shows exactly why state-centered laws do not work in the way governors believe. While this ban stands in California, people in pursuit of these guns could travel across state lines and purchase the weapons in states that allow the sale. An article written by Robert Carlson explains this loophole in the law. Secondary residence in another state can open the door to acquiring guns that are otherwise illegal in their home state (Carlson). Although it is illegal to bring them back to their main place of residency, all that matters is obtaining the weapons.
California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, was very upset about this decision and claimed that it would result in the loss of many innocent lives and put people in danger in the state. Judge Benitez shows heavy bias in his ruling by claiming, “Like the Swiss Army knife, the popular AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home defence weapon and homeland defence equipment. Good for both home and battle” (Thompson). This quote shows how people see these weapons as a means of security. It also shows the propaganda behind the people who support gun ownership. Advertising weapons of mass destruction as “perfect combinations” of protection doesn’t really put them into perspective for the average buyer. They don’t see the significance that these weapons hold in society. People who own these weapons also can’t use the excuse that they bought it for hunting, because the amount of bullets that are shot from the weapon would completely tear up the animal's body and spoil the meat. The only reason a person would buy an assault-style weapon would be to kill something. I do believe people in America still deserve the right to own their own weapons, but a deadly gun just doesn’t need to be included in that.
Assault weapons have no place in the hands of citizens in America. The excess in violence in the country has already gotten out of hand. If more people purchase these deadly weapons, the deaths will continue. I think it is in the best interest of the entire country to eradicate these weapons. For our country being so sophisticated, it’s a shame that we don’t take the safety measures that every other country has, simply because of pride and entitlement.
Works Cited:
Gumas, Evan D., Munira Z. Gunja, and Reginald D. Williams II. “Comparing Deaths from Gun Violence in the U.S. with Other Countries.” The Commonwealth Fund, 30 Oct. 2024, https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/2024/oct/comparing-deaths-gun-violence-us-other-countries
Mascia, Jennifer. “Are Handguns or Rifles Used More Often in Mass Shootings?” The Trace, 18 July 2023, https://www.thetrace.org/2023/07/mass-shooting-type-of-gun-used-data/.
“The U.S. Has Restricted Assault-Style Weapons Before. Did It Work?” Weekend Edition Sunday, Mar. 2021. EBSCOhost, research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=ec74b555-5566-36d9-a34a-da2066734a86.
Huang, Dih-Dih, et al. “The Sustained Effect of a Temporary Measure: Urban Firearm Mortality Following Expiration of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban.” American Journal of Surgery, vol. 224, no. 1 Pt A, July 2022, pp. 111–15. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.columbiabasin.idm.oclc.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2022.03.027.
Kellner, Douglas. “The Uvalde, Texas School Shooting Massacre.” Educational Philosophy & Theory, vol. 57, no. 2, Feb. 2025, pp. 91–95. EBSCOhost, https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2022.2094763
Gius, Mark. “The Impact of State and Federal Assault Weapons Bans on Public Mass Shootings.” Applied Economics Letters, vol. 22, no. 4, Mar. 2015, pp. 281–84. EBSCOhost, https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2014.939367.
Don Thompson, The Associated Press. “Judge Overturns California Ban on Assault Weapons; Calls Legislation That Had Been in Place since 1989 a ‘Failed Experiment.’” The Toronto Star (Toronto, Ontario), 6 June 2021, p. A10. EBSCOhost, research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=caa7884e-be6a-308b-a980-7c4c166d88d7.
Robert Carlson. “Can I Buy a Firearm in a Different State?” The Gun Zone, https://thegunzone.com/can-i-buy-a-firearm-in-a-different-state/. Accessed 19 Mar. 2026.
Comments
Post a Comment