In light of recent events involving mass shootings, the topic of gun control has evolved into a more popular topic among civilian conversations and political debates. The need for more extensive legislation and regulation regarding gun control is more pressing than ever before.

Now, I am not suggesting that Democrats go prying Republicans’ precious guns out of their hands forevermore.  There are actually many rational ways to go about this. In order to maintain the highest order of safety possible in the US, it is critical that first and foremost, laws regarding gun control are standardized across the country, which can be achieved by making them into federal laws. Extensive background checking wouldn’t hurt either.

I hate to sound like the chanting pedestrian holding a sign saying “honk if you support,” but how many mass shootings will it take? How many innocent people need to die before we modify an outdated amendment?

As reported by Just Facts, 67 percent of murders committed in the US were at the barrel of a firearm in 2008 alone, and according to Mother Jones, in 75 percent of the 70 plus mass shootings in the United States in the last 30 years, the guns used were legally obtained. The number of lives taken in these tragedies is unfathomable. These startling statistics make Americans question their safety in a country that is known as one of the most stable in the world.

Just Facts has stated that Washington, D.C. City Council requires that all firearms in private homes be kept unloaded and rendered temporarily inoperable via disassembly or installation of a trigger lock. Only 0.5 percent of households legally owning firearms had members who actually used the gun for defense, while 67 percent of Americans claim to own one to protect themselves against crime. This is probably due to the fact that one: the chance that an opportunity will arise that they need to engage in self-defense is ever so slim, and two, due to the element of surprise during a blitz attack, people already need a moment to process what just happened, and then on top of that, the safety locks present on many modern guns don’t make it any easier to put the whole “defending” part of self-defense to use in a hurry. I don’t think anyone has ever thought that if fewer people are allowed to have guns, then there will be fewer attacks in the first place.

As for background checks, not only should they be extensively conducted on the purchasers of firearms, but on those living in the household where the firearm will be kept. In the case of the Sandy Hook tragedy in 2012, the gunman took 28 lives with guns registered not to him, but to his mother, whom he lived with. In this case, criminal history might not have appeared for the shooter, whereas red flags in a psychological evaluation would have. This is why I propose that the thorough analysis of criminal records as well as psychological evaluations should be conducted in order for one to purchase a gun. The harder it is to obtain a gun, and the safer the buyers are, the fewer mass shootings and deaths of children and adults alike.

Although self-defense is a completely valid reason to possess fire arms, the most pressing matter is safety for the country as a whole. Through standardized federal laws and more extensive checks and evaluations of the purchasers of firearms, the United States will be a safer place to live.