Virginia Tech shooting:Do tightening firearm laws alone guarantee safety?

The shooting at Virginia Tech University was definitely an incident that attracted the attention of many .Since then, many controversial issues such gun policies, censorship and racial discrimination has been brought to light. Following the massacre at Virginia Tech, many have been debating if stricter laws on fire arms should be enforced. Many advocates are on both sides of the debate. While a minority group suggests that the easy access to guns in America is the main reason as to why America's homicide rate is much higher than in any other industrialized country; a large majority feel that one such incident should not be the sole reason to tighten firearm laws.

I agree that certain gun policies should be reviewed. However, I frankly do not believe that tightening firearm laws alone would guarantee safety. Below I present my views as to why I believe that certain gun policies need to be reviewed.

“I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent.” This quote by Indian philosopher
Mahatma Gandhi is definitely applicable to the massacre at the Virginia Tech.The easy access to guns in America enabled the student, Cho Seung Hui to obtain firearms easily after going through routine background checks. Though these checks were meant to confirm that the firearms were in safe hands, they clearly failed to do so. Furthermore, guns which were meant for self defense were used in the wrong way. As, he soon made the headlines by going on a murderous rampage at his university, killing 32 people. Further investigation showed that Cho Seung-Hui had bought his guns illegally, though with the appearance of legality. He was said to have slipped through a loophole. The question now is, why have laws which demand safety background checks before purchasing of firearms, if they are unable to work effectively. Does it not suggest that stricter laws on gun policies are yet to be enforced?

Furthermore, the legal age for buying a gun in the state of Virginia is only 12.It is almost appalling to visualize small kids carrying guns in their pockets. Though the guns can only be obtained with parental supervision, is it really a necessity to allow kids to have guns. Though I know that tightening this law may not help entirely, I do feel that it is necessary precaution to review this law especially after the Virginia Tech massacre as 12 is too young an age to be carrying a firearm.

However, as mentioned before, tightening firearm laws itself might not guarantee safety. This is because with reference to the massacre, the easy access to guns was not the only reason as to why the incident occurred at Virginia Tech. The murderer, Cho Seung-Hui , a student at the university was identified early as being mentally disturbed. Moreover, he showed possible signs of violence through his writings which increasingly became unhinged. However, these signs which were overlooked led to such a bitter incident to occur. Furthermore, having the idea that gun control laws lower gun crime is a myth. One can declare a place gun-free, as Virginia Tech had done, but people will find ways and means to bring guns into the place. Besides, even if there were even tougher gun policies, access to gun would still remain relatively easy. Those that cannot buy will steal or borrow. Cho Seung-hui was obvious a mentally disturbed individual, and there is evidence that there had been careful planning before the massacre was carried out . The likelihood is that he would have found a way to lay his hands on some form of weapon even if Virginia's, or America's, gun laws were a lot stricter.


Another reason why tightening firearm laws itself might not guarantee safety is because there are cases whereby guns have indeed saved the day. As ironical as it may seem, it is the truth. In a Pennsylvania high school for example, an armed merchant prevented further deaths. Furthermore, there facts that prove that enforcing stricter firearm laws have proved useless. An example is the shooting in Dublane. After the 1997 shooting of 16 kids in Dunblane, England, the United Kingdom passed one of the strictest gun-control laws in the world, banning its citizens from owning almost all types of handguns. However, this didn't decrease the amount of gun-related crime in the U.K. In fact, gun-related crime has nearly doubled in the U.K. since the ban was enacted.

In conclusion, I strongly feel that certain gun policies should be reviewed. However, tightening gun policies or taking them away from people will neither guarantee safety nor remove the guns from the hands of criminals.


Source: nytimes.com