In society’s mind, the Columbine shootings represent everything that is wrong with guns in American society. Here are two young boys with a large stash of guns, both legal and illegal with the horrible plan of murder. Fourteen students and one teacher later, they had accomplished their goal and shocked the world. Quickly society and politicians yelled out for gun control, stricter laws, more regulations and another look at the Brady Bill. They wanted no more guns to fall into the hands of the wrong people. Nevertheless, it was already too late. Many forces mold the viewpoint on gun ownership, possession and control. Two of the most important are money and the mainstream media. If the myths versus the realities of gun control were clearly stated, laws could be modified to prevent and deter crime.
One of the largest myths is that waiting periods make the crime rate lower. This is false. Gary Kleck, a professor from Florida studied statistics from every city and found no correlation between waiting periods and a lower crime rate. Those in favor of gun control have also previously stated this fact. Another myth is that 12-16 children (up to age 20) die from gun violence each day. This looks like a large number; however, the majority of these deaths are related to gang violence, a critical problem. Although the equation of more guns equals higher crime looks well on paper, the facts seem to disprove that theory.
However, it must be stated that special interest groups funded most of this research: primarily the NRA. In the 2000 election, the National Rifle Association contributed 90% of the $3.7 million gun rights groups contributed. They also spend $12 million annually to support certain political candidates or to fund their own research. Most of the studies previously mentioned done by Gary Kleck were sponsored by the NRA. $7.3 million of this money went to Republican candidates. What does this say about gun control? It says that general citizens have no real role in gun control. What laws are passed is based upon which gun rights or gun control groups give the most money. If the Republicans were the ruling party in the house, the senate and the White House, then fewer laws would be passed in favor of gun control. If it were the other way around, Democrats would try to pass more laws with gun control in mind.
A concrete policy suggestion in regards to gun control would be this: get rid of the soft money. However, this is completely impossible. Therefore, gun rights and gun control groups must form a compromise. Until that day reaches, the Brady Bill is the closest policy America has that can do some real good. Though gun rights activists say that there is no correlation between waiting periods and lower crime, there is another argument. Looking through newspapers or watching television news there is always an article about how in a “jealous rage” or a person “in a flash of anger” shot their girlfriend, employer, etc. How many of these situations could have been thwarted by having a waiting period? An exact answer will never be known, but one can come to a safe conclusion that the waiting period, or “cooling off period” could not hurt. Very rarely are the stories like this reported.
Guns will always play a major role in our society. Unless both sides are willing to compromise, gun violence will continue to rise. Could Columbine have been prevented? Maybe. Was the Brady Bill at fault? No. A girlfriend purchased the two shotguns, and many of their 20 guns stashed in their room were illegal to begin with. The Brady Bill, though simple in nature is the best policy America has on guns. By giving five-day waiting periods, it allows those in a rage to cool off, and allows for a background check so that guns would not fall into the wrong hands. It is not the end all to gun control. There are still loopholes ands modifications that need to be looked at. However, at the current time it is the best we have.
