The Student News Site of the Latin School of Chicago

The Forum

The Student News Site of the Latin School of Chicago

The Forum

The Student News Site of the Latin School of Chicago

The Forum

310: How Many More?

%0A%09%09%09%09%09%09
REUTERS

310. That’s how many students have been killed by guns in schools since 1980. 310 lives ended too soon. I used to never get scared during lockdown drills; they used to be practice for something that I assumed would never happen at my school. But for some reason, this time, waves of fear were being sent throughout my body. Four days before the lockdown drill was the shooting at Umpqua Community College. 1,027 days before the lockdown drill was the shooting at Sandy Hook. 3,097 days before the lockdown drill was the shooting at Virginia Tech. 6,014 days before the lockdown drill was the shooting at Columbine High School. With more and more students dying in schools as a result of shootings, I begin to questions whether these practice lockdown drills are as pointless as I used to make them out to be. Are we really practicing for something that will never happen? This was the first lockdown drill that I was scared. I was afraid that this time the lockdown drill was not a drill. I was afraid that it was real. My heart was racing, hands were shaking, and I could not sit still. During those fifteen or so minutes I sat and thought it what would have been like to be in a classroom at Umpqua Community College, Sandy Hook, Virginia Tech, or Columbine. I thought about how last year my biology teacher, Ms. Schmadeke said that in the event a shooter came into the classroom, she would do everything in her power to protect us, her students. I thought about what I would do if a shooter came into the classroom. I thought about what my parents would do with my room if I died. I thought about if any gun laws would change as a result of my murder. And I thought about how frustrated I would be knowing that I died in a shooting but still nothing happened to stop mass shootings from happening in the future. These thoughts kept blowing through my head for the next fifteen minutes until I heard the all clear. Then my life returned to normal. However, that is not always the case. 138 schools have been involved in a mass shootings. 138 schools that had practiced doing the same lockdown drills as us. 138 schools full of students and teachers who had no idea what was going to happen at their school that day as they walked through the front doors. Mass school shootings are going to keep happening until our lawmakers can do something about the massive problem our country has with guns. Arming teachers is not the answer. Passing more concealed carry laws are not the answer. This is a gun problem. While scouring the Internet for an answer how to stop school shootings I came across an Atlantic article that said, “Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).” Even though correlation does not mean causation in most statistical findings, this is significant evidence that points to more gun control legislation as the solution to stop mass shootings.   I wish to live in a United States where no student, from junior kindergarten to junior in college, is gunned down in a place that is supposed to be  safe. A place where students are supposed to grow. A place where students are supposed to learn. A place where the only time bodies should lay on the ground is during naptime. Gun violence is not just happening in schools. There are shootings in churches, shootings near our homes, shootings on our streets: all killing future generations, killing innocent people who should never have to worry about leaving their homes and being shot. I came across is a sad realization while writing this piece: with the absence of laws to stop shootings, there will come a point in time when we are going to stop asking if this can happen at Latin and instead ask when this will happen.]]>

View Comments (7)
More to Discover

Forum Awards Are Back!

Submit by May 1st

Comments (7)

All The Forum Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • R

    rhermanNov 2, 2015 at 7:26 pm

    Chris, I would also like to say that there are only two documented incidents that I can find in which a legally owned automatic firearm was used to commit a crime. Yes, automatic guns can be legally owned but only after completing number of tedious steps, including numerous back grouch checks, taxes, and having fingerprints taken. Legal firearms are not the problem in the US. Gun restrictions would only take guns away from people like me, legal and responsible gun owners, while allowing violent criminals to continue using illegal firearms. If we want to create a safer nation, than current gun laws need to be enforced and America’s mental health-program needs to improve.

    Reply
  • R

    rhermanNov 2, 2015 at 7:14 pm

    I think you choose to ignore the past. If you look at the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, also known as the Clinton gun ban, one would see the firearm restrictions did not lower firearm crimes. Instead, firearm related crimes increased during the years of this ban. Legal gun owners are not the problem, it is those who choose to break the law and use non-registered firearms.
    Here is a great video: https://youtu.be/HKE-4cqhego

    Reply
    • C

      cmauriceNov 2, 2015 at 7:39 pm

      I just want to point out a few things from the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban. First thing is that this law only banned 18 firearms. On top of that, gun manufactures were able to slightly modify guns so that they didn’t fall under the ban. Second, that law didn’t prevent people from owning or even reselling assault weapon or magazine that was manufactured before the law went into effect in 1994. What this means is that there were still 1.5 million assault weapons and more than 24 million high-capacity magazines in circulation. The reasons this law didn’t work was because there were too many loopholes for gun manufactures to still produce the same guns that hold roughly the same amount of bullets.
      What the past tells me is that when Adam Lanza shot 26 people in Sandy Hook Elementary School on Friday, he was using “a semiautomatic rifle that had the ability to rapidly fire multiple high-velocity rounds. He was also equipped with magazines that held 30 bullets each.” What need is there for a legal gun-owning citizen to need magazines that hold 30 bullets?
      Also, I would like to see a source that says that because of this assault rifle ban that crime increased. And on a final note I did not watch your video because I think the NRA is pretty biased on the issue of gun control and they do not present a real, feasible solution. Find me an impartial source that provides a good combat to gun violence, I would love to look at it.
      You can read all that information I use in this response here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/12/17/everything-you-need-to-know-about-banning-assault-weapons-in-one-post/

      Reply
      • R

        rhermanNov 3, 2015 at 3:51 pm

        Whether you like them or not, semiautomatic guns won’t be leaving anytime soom. The founding fathers wrote the second amendment so that our nation could overthrow the government if it were to become tyrannical. This is why these guns are necessary. I also would like to share the multiple other reasons why ar platform firearms are beneficial. One being that they are low recoil allowing younger shooters and women to be introduced to the sport of shooting. In addition, they have a number of hunting applications.

        Reply
        • C

          cmauriceNov 3, 2015 at 6:20 pm

          Younger children… really. Take a look at this story: http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/26/us/arizona-girl-fatal-shooting-accident/
          “Charles Vacca was accidentally shot in the head as he instructed the 9-year-old girl how to fire an Uzi, an 9mm submachine gun.”
          I disagree with you on your interpretation of the second amendment. The second amendment was written when a “well regulated Militia,” otherwise know as the British army, was going to attack us; not because they wanted to protect citizens from the government. And I must ask you, What use would a legal gun-owning citizen need a gun that holds 30 rounds? Can’t legal gun owners who use guns for hunting and other activities use guns that hold fewer bullets?

          Reply
  • C

    cmauriceOct 19, 2015 at 8:08 pm

    Hi Henry,
    Thank you for commenting on my piece. I don’t think comparing Switzerland and the United States fits this circumstance. First of all, Switzerland is one of the least culturally diverse nations in the world, and according to this article (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/07/18/the-most-and-least-culturally-diverse-countries-in-the-world/) the U.S is more culturally diverse than Switzerland. Culturally diversity is not the only difference between the United States and Switzerland. Yes, the citizens of Switzerland own guns, but you cannot assume that the practices put in place in Switzerland will be able to work here: we are two different nations with many differences.
    If you look at the difference in gun laws between our two nations you can see some major differences.
    This Time Magazine article states that in Switzerland, “The law allows citizens or legal residents over the age of 18, who have obtained a permit from the government and who have no criminal record or history of mental illness, to buy up to three weapons from an authorized dealer, with the exception of automatic firearms and selective fire weapons, which are banned.” (http://world.time.com/2012/12/20/the-swiss-difference-a-gun-culture-that-works/)
    The first piece of this is the mental illness factor. In more than 40 states someone can buy firearms through “private sales” without undergoing any type of screening at all. (http://smartgunlaws.org/universal-gun-background-checks-policy-summary/) This means that someone with a metal illness can obtain a gun through a private sale.
    The second piece involves “with the exception of automatic firearms and selective fire weapons.”
    In a 2012 presidential debate Mitt Romney said, “of course we don’t want to have automatic weapons, and that’s already illegal in this country to have automatic weapons.” Sadly, he was wrong. It is completely legal to own a fully automatic weapon in the United States. As the L.A Times puts it “The National Firearms Act of 1934, the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the Hughes Amendment in 1986 have all placed limits on how automatic guns can be bought and sold, but did not make it illegal to possess them entirely.” (http://articles.latimes.com/2012/oct/16/news/la-pn-romney-illegal-automatic-weapons-20121016)
    I’ll take your word and believe that 50% of the population is Switzerland own guns, and I will agree with you in that there have not been a lot of major gun crimes in Switzerland either. However, I must ask you, if 50% of the population in the United States owned a gun do you think violence would go down?
    Can’t wait to hear your response and continue this debate about important issues facing the future of our nation.

    Reply
  • H

    Henry MarkarianOct 19, 2015 at 4:00 pm

    Around ½ of people in Switzerland own guns. I haven’t heard of a major crime there in a while.

    Reply
Activate Search
The Student News Site of the Latin School of Chicago
310: How Many More?