At the beginning of 2013, the city council of one city in the U.S. decided that the ultimate solution to violence was the arming of all people above the age of eighteen in its jurisdiction. Even visitors would be required to carry a gun. Those opposing it had no choice, but to either abide by the ordinance or to leave the city. This seemed like the perfect solution. Later, they determined that there must be mandatory gun training. What about people who were elderly? Should they be allowed to carry guns when their vision and some had mental stability was questionable? Also, what about people with some form of mental illness? In turn, they enacted a regulation to screen those who were mentally incapable of owning a firearm. Then, one day a person came into town with a machine gun and killed about fifty people. The council decided maybe everyone should now have machine guns so that they would be equal. What about those who could not afford machine guns? It was concluded that that this was their problem. The premise was that things could be resolved with guns; no matter the level of conflict. This resulted in more gun tragedies related to domestic violence. When one man was fired from a job, he shot his boss before he could reach for his gun. Of course, he was killed by other workers. It was resolved that even though there was increased violence that everyone was safer.
This hypothetical situation is symbolic of the division that our country is enduring. No one could dispute that the ever reoccurring mass killings is a tragedy. Yet, it also goes on in smaller cases almost daily. We have on one hand a radical segment that would ban handguns, automatic weapons, and assault weapons and make stringent regulations on buying a gun to those who want greater freedom to purchase guns. Both sides interpret the Second Amendment in two diametrically different manners.
Urban areas are where the majority of gun violence occurs. It is the responsibility of the Federal, State or city/county government to curtail gun violence at the local level? What is the right mix of regulations that curtain gun violence and be acceptable to most people? What is apparent is that we as a nation are polarized on this issue to the point of paralysis. Differing opinions vary by households, neighborhoods and cities within different parts of the U.S. But, we have to develop a dialog and not one of bullying one opinion over another. “Shouting matches” never resolve in good solutions.