Coming from the perspective of the father of a 15 year old boy who died in the 1999 Columbine School Shooting, I imagined that gun control activist Mr. Tom Mauser would have a fairly extreme opinion about gun control and gun distribution in the United States, but his speech proved me wrong. Yes, it is true that Tom had a fairly liberal view on gun control, but it is also important to note that he is not an anti-gun activist, he in a gun control activist, therefore he can see the point of view of gun lovers and protest in a way that is somewhat neutral to his “opposition”. Before beginning his talk, Mr. Mauser explained how sensitive of a subject gun control is, which results in people dismissing it as a subject of discussion. Gun control is becoming an increasingly polarized topic for both schools of thought, making gun control harder to improve throughout the United States. Another important point to consider is how the Supreme Court reacts to the second amendment. Contrary to most conservative beliefs, the Supreme Court analyzed the second amendment to take into consideration gun control regulation programs, generally, on top of the right for citizens to bear arms.
This talk was specifically eye opening to me because it provided me with new pieces of evidence in support of a gun control activist’s point of view. Specifically, Tom talked about the loophole in the “Brady Bill”, which allows for purchase of guns without background checks, especially those at gun shows. Tom also offered an analogy of TSA screening in comparison to mandatory background checks for gun purchasing in the United States. The analogy goes: 40% of people get around background checks while purchasing guns in the U.S., how would you feel if the same 40% were exempt to TSA screening before boarding a plane? Previously, my opinion was split between slightly conservative and slightly liberal viewpoint on gun control, but Tom’s speech really opened up my eyes to the more liberal side of gun control (while still presenting both sides of the argument). The fact that I can easily sympathize for Tom and his deceased son makes his persuasive speech all that much more impactful, and absolutely swayed my opinion in a way that others have not been able to. Tom’s speech was very thorough, but I still have one unanswered question: After mentioning the positives and negatives about absence and presence of gun control, what is the ideal balance between absence and presence that would result in harmony between conservative and liberal points of view on gun control. If there is an ideal balance, would this be the answer to gun control in the United States that could cut down on death and violence?
