Sandy Hook Mass Shootings

958 Words4 Pages
The state and region that individuals live in greatly determine their opinions on how gun control and amendment application should be interpreted. A study was done 4 months after the sandy hook mass shooting where children were killed, the study determined the belief of gun control after this tragedy. The researcher Kevin H. Wozniak found that, “ [only] a slim majority of Americans favors a semiautomatic weapon ban and proposals to make gun control laws stricter,” (Wozniak 2). Even directly after a mass shooting there is only a slim majority on a weapons ban. This makes it clear that the beliefs of guns in American culture are too deeply rooted and the county has become too dependant on them. Their historical context has build the country up…show more content…
Where the weapons were obtained in the sandy hook shooting and the Orlando shooting were dramatically different. Lanza took the weapons from his mother who owned them legally, but Lanza was unable to have firearms because of his mental illness. Mateen was cleared by the federal background check even though the FBI did some monitoring on him. His radical beliefs caught the eye of the federal government, but someone 's religion can not be used to stip individuals of their rights. Lastly he explains that, “cultural beliefs are significantly related to people’s opinions about gun control, but the strongest, most consistent predictors of people’s gun control preferences are their political beliefs and affiliations,” (Wozniak 2). This goes back to what I was saying where the regions influence what your belief is. But not only location, the political belief which is dependant on a few different things including, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, religion, etc. This means that it doesn 't matter how many people get killed by gun violence, either legal or illegal, will affect the ideology of each side 's…show more content…
Studies done after the sandy hook shooting have found that, “ Contrary to pro-gun lobby claims, research into prevention of gun violence has shown that reasonable reforms could reduce the excessively high rates of firearm deaths in the US while preserving access firearms, possession is not illegal for people proposed do not infringe on law abiding citizens ',” (Vittes 6). This has two main point to it, the first and most clearly is that it is irrelevant on what one 's believes might be, reasonable gun control will save Americans lives. The more subtle meaning behind this study was that gun lobby 's push the agenda that their companies are protected by right. The gun manufacturing business is no small group of occupations. They receive money by having customers purchases firearms, which they donate to political parties to pass different legislation. The less regulation there is on the purchase of firearms the more and quicker people buy them. This isn 't an issue of whether there should be certain rights should be given up for the protection of citizens or whether that firearms should be an American value as a form of protection, in the politics and corporations eyes. Its simply two things they are focused on, whether it will get them reelected for the next term, and whether it will generate enough revenue from
Open Document