Imagine if a properly trained professor at Virginia Tech or a teacher at Sandy Hook Elementary school had a gun with them to stop the murderers. Fewer deaths would have occurred but we can never be sure. One thing we can be sure about is that Americans cannot protect themselves with all the Gun-control laws. Between concealed carry, background checks, extended waiting periods, and laws regulating where guns are permitted, it is just easier to not have a gun. Life is not easy and the data clearly shows that guns aren’t at fault. The facts are that guns prevent major shootings, and that the more guns mean fewer murders support my side, Anti-Gun Control.

To start, properly trained people who have guns prevent major shootings and save countless lives. For instance, in 1974, 34 Israeli Students were gunned down on their way to school, so a predictable outcome was that the Israeli government gave bus drivers and teachers weapons to defend themselves and the students. On the Contrary, the United States felt like they should make a law that bans guns within 1,000 feet from a school after that attack happened. Now the reliable gun owners that work at schools cannot protect themselves and the students. The Pro-Gun Control side reasons that no one will bring a gun to school. What makes people think that the murderers and criminals will follow this law? For crying out loud, criminal means someone who breaks laws; it’s not like they are just going to follow this one. Also, banning guns means that it is a gun-free zone. When mass murderers see gun free signs it translates to free shooting since no one is going to stop them. The Pro Gun Control side says that Gun Free Zones are for safety, but if there were many robberies in your neighborhood and one person got shot during one, would you feel safe leaving your family at home with a sign in front saying this is a Gun-Free Zone? More than likely, you would not feel safe leaving your family but a majority of schools are Gun Free and have signs, yet people feel totally safe dropping their children there. The two states that allow guns on college campuses, Utah and Oregon, have never had a school shooting. Next, if you compare all the major shootings you would see most of them happen at malls, schools, or movie theaters. It is because the people there are defenseless and they can’t do anything to stop a shooter. To prove my point, how often do you hear about a major shooting at a police station, gun show or a shooting range? Most murderers are scared of properly trained people with guns and if those people can defend themselves everywhere, tragic massacres will not happen. Specifically, one example of how a good person stopped a possible massacre is when, Assistant principal Joel Myrick stopped Luke Woodham, who killed two people prior, by confronting him with a gun he retrieved from his car (Weingarten, Dean). Another instance is when 2 students at the Appalachian School of Law forced a gunman to lower his weapons by confronting with their weapons (Weingarten, Dean). This isn’t a coincidence, guns scare murderers. To conclude, when properly trained people have guns, they prevent major shootings from occurring.

Next, more guns mean less murders since people with guns can defend themselves. In particular, Norway has the highest gun ownership rate compared to its fairly low murder rate (per amount of people). Specifically, there are 111 murders a year but there are 1.32 million guns in the citizens’ hands. That means for every one person killing someone there are 11,891 people who aren’t. Is that any reason to ban guns? To compare, there are 257 traffic deaths a year in Norway and 502 suicides. So are people going to start banning cars and watching over their children like hawks? No, of course not. The Pro Gun Control side argues that Japan has low gun ownership and low murder rates so obviously fewer guns mean fewer murders. One, it is the only country in the world that shows that data and two, there are way more countries showing the opposite. Another example is England banned all guns in 1997 yet in 2000 they had the world’s highest industrialized murder rate. It’s because criminals still have guns even though law abiding citizens don’t. It is not like they can snap their fingers and all guns turn into ash. So now the criminals can easily go steal anything anywhere and for the most part have no resistance from the people trying to stop them. Also, the citizens cannot overthrow the government because they have nothing to oppress the government with. The problem is though guns are not the issue. It’s the person using the gun. It’s not like the gun gets up, walks down the street and shoots a person. Politicians make laws restraining guns, when what we need is better laws restraining people who get those guns. In short, more guns mean less murders since people can prevent those murders from occurring if they can defend themselves.

Like I said before guns aren’t the issue. People are pointing their finger at the gun instead of the people holding the gun and therefore the gun is being kicked under the bus. The facts are clear, guns prevent shootings and more guns mean fewer murders. Unless something happens where people understand guns save lives, guns may end up like a telegraph, outdated and useless. The only difference is it would be illegal. Don’t let it get to the point of no return, have a gun, save a life.