In-depth look at why the U.S. doesn't ban guns

Reporter: Xiong Lingdiao 

Editor's Note: On June 12, 2016, a gay bar in Orlando, Florida, was attacked by a gunman with an extremist religious background, resulting in the tragic deaths of 50 people and the wounding of 53 others. U.S. officials called it the worst terrorist attack since 9/11. So, with all the shootings in the US , why the delay in banning guns? Is it really just because of political interference by arms dealers? Is the government's repeated call for a gun ban really just for the sake of the people?

Before I tell the story of the gun debate in America, I'd like to spin a few tidbits:

A Jewish-American of Russian origin wondered when he learned that Israel was creating a detailed archive of all the Jews who had been persecuted to death: how could these victims be defenseless? He later found out that before World War II the German people were also legally armed, but after Hitler came to power, he first registered guns and then managed to gradually confiscate them, so that the Jews were incapable of resisting and eventually had to be slaughtered with their hands tied. He was thus convinced that the loss of weapons for self-defense was one of the causes of the tragedy of the Jewish people. He had several kinds of guns, big and small, in his house, and he said: "I also hope that I will never have to use these guns. But you should know that a gun is not a tool, a gun is a right." 

An American girl once heard that there were house raids in the 1960s and 1970s in the zhongguo, and she could hardly believe who would have the guts to do so. Because in the United States, just a few amendments to the Constitution is by no means a piece of paper, it is guaranteed by the entire judicial system, supported by countless cases. Simply put, whenever such a situation occurs, the law, according to the Constitution, is in favor of the shooting party, but in order to avoid accidental injury, a warning must be given beforehand, and if the aggression continues after being warned, the owner has the right to shoot without having to bear the consequences afterwards. So, I haven't heard of any cases of forced demolition and seizure of land in the US. 

April 16, 2007 Blacksburg (Virginia) University Shooting: A 23-year-old Korean student was shot at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech) in Blacksburg, Virginia.
University) shot and killed 32 people and drank himself to death.December 14, 2012 Newtown, CT Elementary School Shooting: a young man shot and killed 32 people at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.
School) shot and killed 20 children and 6 adults and killed himself after shooting indiscriminately. He shot and killed his mother at home before committing the crime.June 12, 2016 Orlando, Florida (FL) Nightclub Shooting: a heavily armed gunman opens fire and takes hostages at a nightclub, killing at least 50 and injuring 53 people.

Almost every four or five years, a tragic shooting occurs in the United States. However, judging from the phenomenon of time, the adoption of extreme retaliatory social shooting behaviors is also only a small probability event. I remember two years ago, there was a mainland child peeing in the street in Hong Kong news, in fact, more than 400,000 tourists to Hong Kong every day, the child peeing in the street behavior is only a case. However, the media often spread the small probability of the incident, the incident itself will present another kind of bias probability, for example, let the Hong Kong people think that the mainland people are so unqualified as well as the United States seems to have major shootings year after year.

For those in power, the possession of weapons by the common people is a very threatening thing. Whether it is a threat to their rule, or on public safety. At the very beginning of America's declaration of independence, the right to own guns was granted to its citizens, and the most important role of guns for American citizens in the declaration was nothing less than to overthrow a lethargic and corrupt government. Because of this foundation of belief, perhaps more than any other country in the world, the U.S. government is afraid of the common man having a gun, because the significance of the gun's existence is very clear.

We cannot deny that the Declaration of Independence, drafted on the North American continent on July 4, 1776, is one of the greatest documents in the history of mankind, guaranteeing people's freedom from tyranny and power. 1789, when the First Congress of the United States was convened, the Second Amendment to the Constitution was submitted as a balancing force to restrain the federal power of the Congress and the President, and was ratified in 1791, together with nine other constitutional amendments, making up the first 10 articles of the U.S. Bill of Rights. In 1791, it was ratified along with nine other constitutional amendments, making up the first 10 articles of the U.S. Bill of Rights. Article II of the U.S. Bill of Rights states, "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." This was a precautionary measure put in place by the founders of the United States in anticipation of possible governmental alienation, and it did go some way toward preventing what had happened in other countries: the helplessness of unarmed people in the face of governmental military oppression, and it also gave Americans, as individuals, a great deal of confidence in the protection of their own private property and land. 

Terrorist attacks can happen in any country in the world, and the American government as well as the people have learned their lesson the hard way, while calling for a ban on guns and gun control year after year. However, the slogan has been shouted for many years, why can't it be realized in the end? There are many experts who analyze thatPressure for U.S. gun reform comes mainly from arms dealers, we all know that in capitalist countries, consortia can exert pressure on politics. But today, the author would like to say that this argument is simply nonsense. First of all, the United States light weapons profits are very low, far less than the heavy weapons such as aircraft and artillery, the annual profits of civilian light weapons account for the total profits of the arms group is very small, arms dealers will not be for the sake of this small profit and the "nation's determination to ban the gun with one heart" red face. So, why is it that after so many years of clamoring for a ban on guns, there has been so much clamor for it, but no action has been taken on it. The truth is that there are not that many people in the United States who are in favor of banning guns!

When I went to college, I once asked three American teachers about the issue of banning guns, and they said that guns are indeed very dangerous, but without guns they will be more dangerous, and a lot of American men are against the implementation of the gun ban. With the help of American gun and arms dealers' regency reports, the domestic media can enhance the superiority of our system and let people reflect on the lack of the American system. In fact, the U.S. government wants to control guns very much, but the voices that have been hindering it are not exactly from the arms dealers, but also from the civilian population in the country.

For the American public.Tyranny is much scarier than murder.The average number of people who die in gunfire accidents in the United States each year is about 700. The average number of people killed by gunfire in the U.S. each year is about 700, which may be appalling, but it pales in comparison to the more than 30,000 people killed in traffic accidents in the U.S. each year [List of motor vehicle deaths in U.S. by
YEAR] The average American police officer takes six minutes to arrive at the scene of a crime, the average time for a violent crime is at ninety seconds, and it only takes six seconds to pull out a gun to create a deterrent. Are guns really so useless when compared to the 750,000 lives they save each year and the 2.5 million violent crimes they prevent?

Going a bit farther, controlling firearms will not reduce crime. The U.S. has a well-developed network and high civilian processing power. When terrorists plot to launch terrorist attacks, there is no need to use firearms. For example, the marathon bombing in Boston used a rice cooker and explosives. The Bath school bombing in the US also used mass explosives (45 dead, 58 injured). Also the problem with terrorist attacks is not the misuse of firearms, but national development. The same is true of Switzerland, where the entire population is in the military, and basically you rarely hear of a mass shooting tragedy in Switzerland. In fact, there is no necessary link between the crime rate and guns, economic development and the national system is the root cause of the tragedy.

American politicians tend not to ponder over the social conflicts caused by the disparity between the rich and the poor when a shooting tragedy occurs, and they do not deeply review the problems in society, but throw the pot squarely at the anti-social elements who are "mentally twisted". On the other hand, he continues to call for the implementation of gun control and banning of firearms, frantically fanning the public. It is saddening to see that President Barack Obama, while sending his children to an elementary school protected by nine heavily armed guards, said, "I am skeptical about the usefulness of having armed guards in schools."

The anti-gun slogans of American politicians are aimed at winning public opinion and votes on the one hand, and their own deep-seated interests on the other. A portion of intelligent American citizens certainly do not buy it, Western history has a lot of dictators step by step to confiscate the weapons of citizens and finally the implementation of tyranny cases, the opening question mentioned Hitler is a typical, the American public early on a good lesson. The implementation of gun control needs to amend the current Constitution, and this process needs to be supported by the states, there are currently 44 U.S. states explicitly protect the right of citizens to bear arms, behind the back of the citizens after careful consideration of the choices made. Are there really that many Americans who support total gun control? Some, especially fellow women, but this phenomenon has been amplified quite a bit by the national media (in fact, popular opposition to gun control in the U.S. has never been lower than the voices of those in favor), with the specific political implications stated earlier.

Finally and realistically, time has moved on to the 21st century and guns are no longer a powerful weapon for citizens to overthrow their government, nor are they a major source of terror and murder. Like the automobile it can be both convenient and dangerous to the user, everything is a double edged sword and it is not objective to over evaluate the negatives of something.

As an aside, the Declaration of Independence gives people the fundamental right to use firearms, and we can't just see that, we can see that it's all about the "people" and freedom. We can see its superiority in that whether you advocate for gun bans or strongly defend the right to bear arms, it's not like someone is holding a gun to the back of your head and forcing you to make a sound.