Gun control isn't a red versus blue issue

February 20, 2018


Even after the Parkland tragedy, I am still not against guns. But, hear me out. 

I’m originally from Miami which is just an hour away from Parkland so when news first broke about this particular school shooting, it obviously hit home for me as a Floridian and as a student. 

Since the start of this year there have been several school-related shootings and as sad as it is, seeing updates on the news every day contributed to the normalization of it all until now.

My social media feed has been flooded with very liberal minded posts and shares about banning guns, specifically AR-15s, much stricter gun laws/background checks and, comparisons to other countries, mainly European ones.

I never expected that I would be so annoyed at seeing those posts or disagree so strongly but, here I am. 

Banning guns is definitely not the answer. We tried banning alcohol and people still managed to drink. Those who wish to inflict harm will become more creative and prepared, unfortunately. 

Since America was America, guns have been prevalent so it’s just not realistic to eliminate them.


And for those who are applauding the U.K., Germany, Canada, Italy, Sweden and Japan etc. for their laws on gun control, it works for them because their country’s mindset is completely different and closer to being unanimous than in the U.S. 

In each individual state there are pockets of conservatives and pockets of liberals who do not agree on the matter, that is why a ban would not work.


You may not care to carry a weapon in the case of an incident but the second amendment protects others’ right to. I’m not one to infringe on how others decide to feel safe. 

I agree that the process of obtaining a gun should be more extensive and thorough. I also wonder how history would play out if guns were treated the same way that cars are by requiring training, tests, health requirements, insurance and inspections. 

Going to school or sending your child to school should be an easy thought but we also have to accept the fact there is a multitude of dangerous individuals roaming around.


It’s vital to be cautious and prudent. I don’t buy that lunatics who commit heinous crimes are just “not right in the head.” It goes far beyond mental health; those kind of people cannot be redeemed. They do not deserve to be redeemed. 

I read a snippet of an argument which said something like, “We don’t want higher fences and metal detectors…We want change.


We want genuine, lasting change.” That is the goal, of course, but if a metal detector or other reliable measures will keep people safe, then I’m okay with that option. Prayers are not the solution and blaming guns is not the solution.

I came across the address the Parkland survivors made and part of me greatly commends these young people on their ambition in this movement and fearlessness against law makers and the ‘adults who have failed them.’ 

But the one line I didn’t like and that immediately alienates is their slogan, ‘you’re with us or against us.’ They have become resilient in their fight and their ability to recruit millions of supporters on a social media platform but singling themselves out and making the situation into a threat or a me vs. you, isn’t the smartest thing to say or mentality to have.   

One of the students had it right when they said in an interview that this isn’t a red and blue thing. Several ideas and changes need to be considered, it has always been a bipartisan issue if improvement is to be expected.

Doing nothing isn’t going to go unnoticed anymore.

Please reload

Featured Posts

Tejanas national champions

November 15, 2014

Please reload

Recent Posts
Please reload

Search By Tags