In recent events, such as school shootings, the topic of gun laws linger upon the lips of the public. A constant battle exists in the United States on whether or not guns should be pulled from the shelves or be as readily available as they are. As a gun ends the life of one and saves the life of another, what should be done to maintain a more secure country?

“Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.”

This is a famous quote that has been shared among masses on social media. Obviously this is true, without a person present to pull the trigger a gun does not have the capability to murder someone. However, without a gun, it makes it a lot harder to kill someone. While the individual is the one who makes the decision to kill, it’s also a matter of the weapon. A gun makes the move much easier and thoughtless.

Using a gun to kill is a mindless act, as opposed to that of a knife, spear, and other such weapons. A man could end one’s life and turn his back in the same moment that a bullet sweeps through the air, but a man who wields a knife must drag out his process to continue on with his goal. A gun takes a swift motion of the finger to pull the trigger. Due to the speed of a bullet, no emotion or thought has to be involved. There’s no need for second thought in the eye of a gun.

When the gun holding population of the United States hears the term “gun laws”, their mind immediately jumps to the conclusion that guns will be banned entirely. The point of stricter gun laws isn’t to rid them entirely, but rather make them more difficult to access. Guns should be kept securely available for use among shooting ranges, hunting grounds, and authorities. It shouldn’t be so easy for an individual, even your average high school student, to pop online and find guns for sale. It shouldn’t be so simple for someone, unlicensed, to go to a flea market and buy a gun, without a license. A family shouldn’t be able to go to a Walmart and see guns for sale right in front of their eyes as they shop for groceries. Gun laws don’t mean getting rid of guns entirely, but rather making it more difficult for the average, possibly dangerous, individual to have access to them.

“But even if we do get stricter gun laws, people will still get killed! People will still get guns.”

Another well known argument. Let’s explore the countries where there are tight gun laws, such as South Korea and Australia. In South Korea, not just guns but all types of weaponry, such as guns, knives, and explosives, are regulated. Owning or distributing firearms is considered highly illegal, and there are virtually no guns available to civilians. To get a gun in South Korea, it has to be permitted by the police office under specific conditions. However, citizens under the age of 20, have impaired mental capacity (including drug charges), or have been previously convicted or sentenced to jail cannot legally obtain a gun. Gun permits in South Korea are renewable every 5 years, but it is required to take a gun safety course to even be granted one.

Furthermore, typically the only people who own guns in South Korea, other than military, are hunters, but they still aren’t allowed to have their guns at all times. During off-season, they must keep their rifles at the police station. Even at that, there are not many hunters in South Korea, and handguns are practically nonexistent. If there are any firearm related incidents in this country, it usually only occurs among the military, considering that’s the only location where guns could possibly be obtainable.

Similarly in Australia, gun laws were tightly secured after the shooting incident that occurred in 1996. After this incident, John Howard was able to successfully draw back 650,000 guns from distribution. High caliber rifles and shot guns ended up being banned, and gun permits became highly difficult to receive. In the years after John Howard built up gun restrictions, the likeliness of dying by the odds of a firearm fell by 50%, and have remained that way ever since.

Guns will most likely never go away entirely in the United States, due to the amendments this country has been built upon as well as the bundles of conservatives. But the least this government could do is limit the resources of those who commit the crimes just as South Korea and Australia have. It takes so much more effort to kill an individual with a tool that isn’t automatic, and it creates a much more personal situation. Mass murders are less heard of in other developed countries because it’s much more difficult to do such a job by the effort of one’s own body.

Overall, while murderers should be dealt with in an appropriate manner, guns need to be dealt with as well. It is true that is it up to the person and not the weapon that decides to murder, but the clean access of guns in this country must be controlled with better care. These tragedies will never stop, but they can certainly be limited. The rights of a gun in this free land are almost more guaranteed than one’s own safety.