The Issue with Firearms: Constitutional or Controversial Right?

Yusuf Amanullah

It all started when a member of the Muslim community was going to night prayer one evening at the Islamic Center of San Diego, just like he would every day. He parked his car at the curb of one of the residential streets close to the masjid. Unfortunately, adjacent to the sidewalk was the house of a person who apparently had a very aggressive attitude towards people of color. When he saw this Muslim man walking in front of his house to the masjid, he confronted him and started yelling offensive and obscene words. The Muslim man confronted him to try to reason with him. This made the man even angrier, so he continued yelling obscenities at the mosque going person. This exchange continued until the Muslim man said one last thing to the angry person. That was it for the enraged man- he suddenly pulled out a gun and held it to the Muslim’s face, and yelled one final obscenity. He was not joking and it almost looked like that he was actually going to fire his gun. Then, as if by a miracle, he put his gun down, and told the Muslim man to never come back to him ever again. Not long after, the Muslim man called the police to handle this ill-tempered man who had threatened his life. How did this overly aggressive and blatantly Islamophobic person, who lived close to a mosque, get his hands on a gun? What would have happened if the person had pulled the trigger in sheer rage without even realizing it? This true incident that happened recently with a member of the Muslim community in San Diego is just one example of how guns are, unfortunately, getting into the wrong hands way too often.

Citizens like the one in the aforementioned story have the right to bear arms according to the second amendment to the United States constitutions. But news headlines about shootings pop up every day, and the number of casualties caused by gun violence every year has caused the need for restrictions to the second amendment. Despite the great number of casualties caused by gun violence each year, many people still refuse to admit that guns are often the cause of large scale violence. Furthermore, it has been proven that restrictive gun laws lead to lower death rates when such laws are enforced. When these facts are mentioned to these pro-gun lobbies, they will often cry that restricting gun ownership is a restriction of everyone’s second amendment right. They will go further to say restricting gun ownership means less lives will be saved as law-abiding citizens no longer have access to guns. So, who is on the right side?

A large amount of research has been done, with facts supporting both sides of the argument. For example, in a study cited by the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence shows three people die in the U.S. to gun violence every hour, and generally, states with more restrictive gun laws have lower violence rates (National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, 2010). The number of deaths of American soldiers in the first seven years of the Iraq War (4,440) is about the same when it is compared to the number of civilian deaths to gun violence every seven weeks in the US (U.S. Department of Defense, 2012). Pro-gun lobbyists will often cite research from sources that are either false or debunked quickly. For example, pro-gun lobbyists often cite a statistic about gun violence in Washington D.C. A law in Washington D.C. existed from 1976-2008 that banned citizens from carrying handguns (compiled from data collected by the FBI over a period of years). During this period, the homicide rate in the district was far higher than the national average. The issue is, statistics like these have flaws. They either have statistical errors, or do not account for certain factors such as homicides cause by non-firearm weapons.

What is the stance of students around the country on this issue? One eighth grade student from San Diego, California, Syed Ashhal Usmani, supported restrictions on the second amendment, as well as increases to background checks before gun purchases. He also mentioned that more restrictive gun laws would limit the amount of violent deaths each year because other weapons are not as commonly used as guns and not as effective. Another eighth grader from Alpharetta, Georgia, Abdurrahman Arif, provided a slightly different perspective. He says that it is the government’s discretion whether they should place restrictions on the second amendment, and he says they should if the problem of gun related death is out of control (which it is.) He is also in favor of not only background checks, but also banning of assault weapons, requiring of state licenses to purchase firearms, and limiting the amount ammunition purchases that can be made in a given period of time. He opposed the prohibition of carrying a concealed weapon in public, which is allowed to some degree in every state, since he says it may be required for self-defense. He wants not only stricter gun laws, but also stricter enforcement to control the carrying of other things that may be used as weapons, as they may be used instead of guns. When asked whether he thought he would ever own a gun, he said he might own one for self defense, “if the need arises”.

It is clear that gun related violence is a big problem in American society today. How can involved citizens take a part in trying to end gun violence? While the making of the laws are in the hands of state and federal legislature, citizens can make their voice heard by being activists. Citizens should take part in rallies for gun laws, be part of gun control organizations, and vote for representatives that will vote in favor of gun restrictions. Even with the future of gun restriction laws looking dim due to the pro-gun positions adopted by the president-elect and the majority of Congress, citizens should do all they can to make their voices heard.