Three Problems With The Gun Violence Debate

Why we should stop rewarding mass shooters with the notoriety they seek

On Tuesday, the country witnessed another horrific mass shooting event. Nineteen children and two adults were murdered as an 18-year-old gunman opened fire at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas.

The subject of so-called “gun violence” — and particularly mass shootings — is an understandably emotive topic in the United States, with very few areas of American life causing such furious division.

But on both sides of the “debate,” there are fundamental problems, and these fundamental problems are standing as the ultimate barrier to achieving any actual progress in the face of ruthless and senseless violence.

The first issue is that neither side can agree on a primary goal. Now, one primary goal should be to reduce the risk of mass shootings against civilians, and for some, that is the goal. But for others, the goal is to disproportionately eradicate the constitutional right that is gun ownership under the false banner of “doing something.” The other side of this fruitless coin involves a growing body of gun rights advocates who won’t engage in any form of debate simply because of the valid fear that there are those who seek to completely erase the Second Amendment.