Gun violence is a problem throughout the United States. It is acknowledged by the communities who have developed their own opinions, based on the Second Amendment and the legislative process. The legislative process is based on the 229 year old constitution that was created by the founding fathers. At the time it created a structure for the new country. Now talented lawyers and scholars have found loopholes in the system. The loopholes have created chaos and a lack of critical discussion within the government. People should be educated on the legislative process, so they understand who is involved in law making and the great flaws that have developed. Gun violence is greatly affected by the government because of the large divide between gun control and gun rights, and lack of constructive debate.

Mental illness is a well debated topic discussed surrounding gun violence. It is oftentimes wrongfully blamed. Politicians and gun advocates discuss gun violence as an issue with the mental health care in our society. They fail to discuss the amount of access that people, children, and people with mental disorders, have to guns. It is important to gain a better understanding of gun violence so we can identify if the government is taking the correct actions to prevent it. An investigation of mental illness and gun legislation shows that the government does not properly handle gun violence or attempt to prevent it because of the lack of unity when enforcing laws, the lack of seriousness towards gun violence, and gun lobbyist’s ignorant actions to protect the gun business.

All generations should educate themselves about the legislative process, so the government can take action on prevention of gun violence in the future. The process of gun legislation is an issue within the US. The issue affects all people and is important when talking about public safety. Mass shootings have been occurring throughout history, but recently the occurrences have been multiplying. Major deadly mass shootings like Sandy Hook, Las Vegas and Parkland have started the discussion on tighter background checks. It is important for the new generation to learn about the issue and be able to help prevent recurring gun violence in the future. The Second Amendment protects people’s rights to own guns, but because of the new technology the 229 year old amendment seems to be outdated. In the article, “Mixing guns and Mental illness,” Michael Luo argues that professionals are not trained to be able to determine between which people are capable of owning guns safely. The author describes that Ryan Anthony was able to hide his negative intentions and convince the court, by lying to his psychiatrist, that he was stable enough to own guns. At the end of the trial, his guns were returned and he commited suicide (Luo). The author argues that the process of how people are screened for guns is excessively flawed. It is hard for an agency to determine who is sane and able to handle guns safely. Luo further explains how the NRA allows those who are determined to be mentally ill to have their guns back, even if they are deemed dangerous. A was law created to help facilitate record sharing and allows more prerequisites for states to let veterans to gain their gun rights back. After the law was created the NRA started lobbying lawmakers to keep requirements of petitioners to the minimum. Historically, the NRA allows people with history of mental disorders to access guns (Luo). The regulation was cherished by the NRA because of their pity for veterans. Later once the law was passed the NRA pushed that the requirements for access to guns were limited and decreased. Because the government rarely takes actions to avoid gun violence, they allowed the NRA to interfere with the process of assessing those who are mentally ill. The fact that people are able to cheat the system and lie to their psychiatrist about their intentions and allowing them to own guns is truly alarming. Therefore, if the government continues to let organizations interfere with public safety, gun violence will not be prevented.

Gun lobbyist’s ignorant actions to protect the gun business interferes with the government's actions to prevent gun violence. Lobbyists are known to help certain organizations and union groups. However, when lobbyists have deceitful intentions, the government can be manipulated or burdened when trying to develop plans of action. The NRA has an immense budget for lobbying. Even if the public is becoming more dangerous due to guns, the NRA will do whatever it takes to protect guns. Garance Franke-Ruta argues that gun lobbyists are blaming gun violence on background checks and not the large amount of access that civilians have to guns (Franke-Ruta). Gun lobbyists are trying to protect guns from accusations by creating a mental health database. They are blind to the fact that guns need to be directly controlled and  they are continuously blaming it on the mentally ill. The author presumes that gun lobbyists are too busy protecting guns and making sure that the gun organizations are preserved. Gun lobbyists are not acknowledging the amount of gun violence that occurs with stolen weapons. They are not worried about the danger that could be caused by not restricting the allowance of guns. The author points out how even though the government has tried to set up laws to prevent gun violence, they are not effective and avoid dealing with the real issue. After the Virginia Tech massacre, Virginia has tried to make the laws stronger to help prevent gun violence provoked by the mentally ill. The author explains that with all of the control and creation of new laws aimed at the mentally ill, Virginia still had another gun violence massacre (Franke-Ruta). The help for the mentally ill did not alleviate the amount of gun violence, therefore there needs to be control directly focused at purchasing and selling guns. Although the government tried to act on the gun violence that took place in Virginia, gun lobbyists were able to interfere with the process and blame it on mental illnesses. The legislative process is flawed, especially when it comes to the amount of influence that organizations, like the NRA, have on the laws that are written.

The lack of seriousness that the government demonstrates towards gun violence portrays how the government feels and how they act on prevention. In 2018, the amount of people who died from guns in the U.S. was the highest in 50 years (Corin). With the increase in deaths, many believe the government should start discussing solutions. Jaclyn Corin analyzes a bipartisan bill that forced background checks to ensure deadly firearms are harder to obtain. The bill was discussed in Congress’ Gun Prevention Hearing. Corin was able to predict the outcome of the hearing based on the history of the government’s action toward gun violence. She mentions that the bill probably will not even go to vote on because the influence of the members who control the chamber’s voting (Corin). The author recognizes that the government is overlooking school shootings and not taking serious action, like they are with plane crashes. In 2017, there was no deadly commercial plane crashes, but crashes with the Boeing 737s were occuring. Even though many died going to school and none in the 737s, Congress had opened investigations, consequently the government took action to ground all 737s (Corin). Congress was quick to set investigations on the planes, but not the gun violences at schools. Congress' response shows the disproportionate priorities of the government. However, school shootings have taken the lives of thousands and Congress has not made a big enough effort to help inhibit them. When congress quickly intervenes for other serious issues, like the crashing Boeing 737s, and not deadly mass shootings, it causes people to question the government's priorities.

Gun violence cannot be properly handled if there is a lack of unity when enforcing laws. When a law is passed all must be held to the responsibility of following the law. When government officials avoid following the law, it sets a bad example for the public. Matt Vasilogambros claims that some counties are not abiding by state laws because they believe it does not apply to them. New Mexico created a law requiring stronger background checks and  88% of the counties agreed that they would not enforce the new laws (Vasilogambros). The author discusses how the sheriffs believe that the new laws hinders gun rights. Even though the state has created laws that help against gun violence, government officials are refusing to enforce them. The lack of fluidity throughout the state may be dangerous and makes the government appear less legitimate. The author discusses how some counties prioritize certain laws and choose to overlook other laws. Some officials think the gun laws only need to be focused in larger cities so they choose to overlook it. The author explains that some officials choose how much they want to enforce laws based on their location and population (Vasilogambros). Because of the lack of enforcement of certain laws, in specific counties, the state’s government appears to be less legitimate. The laws created by state officials should be followed throughout the state, so that gun violence can be prevented. People rely on the government to protect them, and if officials are not following laws their safety is threatened. The state government cannot take steps to prevent gun violence when county government officials are not following created laws.

The government is not preventing against gun violence by not directly addressing the issue. In 1791, guns could shoot three bullets in a minute, but now guns can shoot more than 400 bullets in a minute (Runcie). Because of the great evolution of guns the government needs to reconsider the Second Amendment and address the issue, for the safety of the public. Dunklin and Pritchard discuss that the government is preventing gun violence by arming schools. Making the schools more secure and shielded will decrease the amount of violence in schools (Dunklin and Pritchard). The schools will receive money from the Congress and the state to increase the security. Even though Congress is giving money for the security of schools, they are not taking action on the real issue of gun violence. If the real issue is not taken care of, the guns will become more dangerous and the security will have to be replaced and made stronger. Runcie explains the negative effects of arming school and critiques the government for not solving the issue directly. Runcie argues that arming schools to prevent gun violence is not the answer and creates other issues (Runcie). Weapons could be a threat because of accidents that may happen, for example, discharges, stolen firearms, and falling guns. Another flaw is if there was school shooting and a teacher tried to protect the students, officials would not be able to determine who was the shooter and who was the teacher. The government is averting the decision to control guns by creating more security for schools. Although Reese Dunklin and Justin Pritchard assert that the government is creating security for schools to help prevent against gun violence, Robert Runcie argues that congress is avoiding to focus on the real problem. Therefore, the government is not making any productive actions toward preventing gun violence.

Ever since my uncle first bought a gun, I questioned the importance. I understand that it is the right of the people and we seem to need protection from the government, but why are these deadly weapons so easy to access? My uncle lives in the heart of Milpitas. He has a stable job, a large house and a lovely wife. He has nothing to worry about, but he is a large gun advocate. Through my research I have analyzed both sides of the argument and while they all have strong opinions, they both agree that action needs to be taken to prevent gun violence. The government, however, is not budging. The lack of cooperation, seriousness, and directness is holding the country back from protecting the citizens from harm. Even my extremely opinionated uncle can agree that the government is not taking care of this growing problem.

The lack of unity when enforcing laws, the lack of seriousness towards gun violence, and gun lobbyist’s ignorant actions to protect the gun organizations illustrates that the government does not take enough action to prevent gun violence within the United States. To solve this large dilemma congress can establish restrictions for the safety of the people. The people can be educated on the matter and participate in educating those around them on the legislative process. It is important that the new generation has progressive ideas, so that the government can be improved and the United States can be stronger.