We as a nation have taken bold steps against bullying in schools. Don’t hit other kids, don’t verbally abuse them, don’t purposefully exclude them. We don’t want children to get hurt at school; that’s the whole goal. There are 'zero tolerance' policies that work exceptionally well. Why is it then that when kids are murdered in school, we are slower to take action? The stakes are infinitely higher, and yet our gun laws are not being justly modified. The ideas of our current administration do not count as just to me; they are backwards and nonsensical. I mean, what if we decided that any teacher who stood witness to a bully in action could just throw an uppercut at the meanie and call it a day? That’s preposterous. Why would we perpetuate the problem, rather than enact that 'zero tolerance' idea that seems to work super duper well? I'm not saying we need to ban guns all together (although personally, I wouldn't mind it at all), but let's tighten the regulations on them rather than distribute them. That's what a progressive nation is supposed to do. Act on problems that arise and actively try to fix them, rather than shrug and say, "At least I'm safe. And so is my gun."
Why is our government impotent when classrooms of children are being taken out by a gun? Bullying used to be the biggest worry for kids in school, and action was taken against it. But those who are targeted by shooters are not going home with a scraped knee or a bruised ego; they are not going home at all. Why are we having to beg Congress to stop allowing the next leading generation from getting slaughtered? Why is it taking so long, and so many lives away from us, before our gun laws are amended?
The foundation of United States law was established not even 250 years ago. Let’s get acquainted with those times. When our founding fathers were writing up the Constitution and Bill of Rights, they owned slaves. It took the better part of a century for slavery to be abolished, because racist individuals and groups were hung up on what they still thought to be their “rights.” We didn’t let women vote for another 50 years or so after that, because the Constitution didn’t guarantee it. We are currently only on the cusp of equality for the LGBTQ community, but we still have a long way to go. We have no agenda for treating mental illnesses, even though they have been the cause of mass shootings time and time again. Why does it take forever for the laws to catch up with the intended progress of this country? The most ignorant members of our government stomp and yell about our “sacred” Constitution, which was written by men who didn’t even make it three years before realizing that it wasn’t really working for them, and that it actually necessitated a whole new bill full of amendments to go with it. Let me reiterate; these same men decided that their code of law needed some progress after such a short time. So how come when 250 years go by, our Congress still clutches to a document that wasn’t even good enough at the time without re-writes and additions? In fact, the drafters realized that the will of society would fluctuate over time, and purposefully gave it elasticity so that Congress would have the power to do whatever is “necessary and proper” to do its job. I’d say saving lives is the proper thing to do. It’s been necessary for a while now. So, you know the end of the sentence, Congress: Do your jobs. You are called law makers, not law reminders. The right to bear arms doesn’t work for us anymore, clearly. So let’s save innocent lives and fix it again.