Greetings
everyone! Today, I have decided to
address the concerns of those who are on the "opposing side" of the
issue of school shootings. Hopefully I
will address all of them but if I have missed one, I would appreciate it.
One concern I
can think of would be, “where would we receive all the money to fund a database
to keep track of those who are likely to commit school shootings or a health
care system that can help those who are mentally unstable?” Well, it is true that in this rough economy,
we are saving as much money as we can when we should be helping those who have
been affected by it. The cost of health
care is difficult enough for so many people as well. So naturally, the cheapest way would seem to
be imposing stricter gun control laws to curb this school violence. However, as stated in previous blog posts,
this is not the most effective method.
Another concern
would be “we should ban the sale of assault rifles so that shooters will not
have access to weapons.” I will admit that
a ban would have a drastic downfall on school shootings. A course of action like that might even have
parents and/or children feel save as well as give some closure to those close
to victims of shootings in the past. This ban will not, however, eliminate school shootings
entirely. Banning assault rifles sounds
almost redundant from this perspective.
One last concern
I can imagine would be “surely there would be an invasion of privacy if we were
to have a nation-wide criminal database to determine who is mentally unstable
or not.” I understand that having a
database this large would conflict with the doctor-patient confidentiality
clause. I understand that the government
should respect some aspects of people’s privacy, but where should the line be
drawn between someone’s privacy and the safety of many people? When someone is
registered as mentally unstable, however, that person can cause severe damage
to the place they work or those who are near them.
Hopefully, these
are some of the major concerns from the “opposing side”. Again, if there are any I have missed, please
let me know in the comments below.
Are you referring to other blog posts when you suggest that imposing stricter gun-control laws would not be the most effective way to raise money. Which post are you speaking of? And what about just raising taxes? That's been done to the tobacco industry and I'm sure someone could make an argument regarding correlation vs. causation (so there is much research and data to review on that issue). America is fond of reviewing a societal ill and legislating taxes on it. Just look at the new pot economy in Colorado!
ReplyDeleteWhy would banning assault rifles seem redundant? That part I wonder about...of course there are other types of guns, but the level of violence would be much lower without assault rifles, right?
These are good concerns regarding the "opposing sides." I do wonder what the reach of the government is with regard to guns and mental illness. I think doctors and psychologists have an obligation to make law enforcement aware of significant threats made within the therapy setting (toward others). How close a relation is this to making note in a registry, and then would the medical practitioner be at risk, too?