By Vinny Frazetto
Sports Editor

America loves three things: guns, God and freedom, but in the aftermath of the recent shootings in Newtown, Conn. and Taft, Calif. the controversial topic of gun control has again been revived. As the debate rages on, it seems as if it would be almost impossible to rid the country of their infatuation with guns without bringing freedom into the equation. With groups, political parties and even the Constitution protecting guns, ridding the country of them will not only be unpopular, but it may prove to be ultimately impossible.

The problem lies not in the availability of guns, but the mental health of those that acquire them in the first place. While guns are more readily available than they should be, the desire to use a gun to harm another human being stems purely from the psyche of the person behind the trigger. People can acquire anything they want if they search hard enough; therefore, what must be monitored is not guns themselves, but watching people more closely and seeing early warning signs.

Any attempt to rid the country of guns would not only be heavily opposed, but prove feeble in general. Much like the prohibition of alcohol in 1920, the prohibition of guns would lead only to more illegal sales and exchanges of firearms. Any substance that is made illegal instantly becomes more popular; people always want what they can’t have, so to make something less attainable, the desire to obtain it is only heightened. We see this everywhere from illegal drugs and even unlawful downloading of music. This would be no different with guns; by taking them away from people, the problem is only made worse.

While the possible banning of guns is a dangerous concept, it is nowhere near as controversial as limiting some people from having guns. Who would be the person deciding whether or not you are mentally stable enough to handle something that can end another person’s life, and who would have thought to limit Adam Lanza’s exposure to guns, or how about James Holmes? Limiting of firearms to any person is a direct violation of the rights designated to all Americans under the Constitution. The limitation of guns to a designated people is a notion that would, much like a full ban of guns lead to only infuriating an already touchy conflict.

Good intentions seem to be eclipsed by the stemming negative variables from any change to the way America has been founded. While it’s a notion that will help parents and government officials sleep well at night, stricter limitation of guns would be a prove to be a senseless attempt. In the end, gun control won’t stop the next school shooting, or any mass shooting in that manner, and with so many Americans on the side of guns, it’s not hard to see why gun control would be deemed unsuccessful.

Gun control isn’t needed in the American society due to the controversies that would arise from its creation. It would lack effectiveness and lead to a divide amongst what is necessary for the safety of people, and what is deemed as unconstitutional.