This Article Will Not Solve Mass Shootings
By Alben Osaki
I have an interesting relationship with firearms. I never shot them growing up. But after joining the military, over the course of four years I shot them quite a lot (and even became quite proficient with them). In fact, even my job title had the word ‘gun’ in it; Gunner’s Mate. In addition, I was also a VBSS (Visit, Board, Search, and Seizure) boarding team member and small arms marksmanship instructor.
The author, center, posing for a photo with the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force
In the Navy, before even seeing a firing range, you go through a day of weapons training in a classroom. This includes weapon and range safety, clearing barrel procedures, drawing and holstering your weapon, marksmanship fundamentals, and more. It doesn’t matter if you’ve been shooting every day of your life or if you’ve never even seen a pistol in person before, everyone goes through the same training. Then you dry-fire; basically practicing shooting and weapons safety without any live ammunition.
Heck, you even shoot in a computer simulator before you ever pick up a loaded weapon.
Mass shootings are a problem in America. I don’t think anyone can argue that. What is argued about is the solution. Crazily enough, folks out there think adding more guns to the equation is the solution. Unfortunately, the police response to the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas showed that a lot of times, the “good guy with a gun” will not stop the “bad guy with a gun,” especially when the “good guy with a gun” is “scared of being shot.”
Let me get this out of the way now: I believe that, at the bare minimum, background checks should be required to purchase a firearm. And I’m not alone in this. Steve Kerr, the head coach of the Golden State Warriors, said that 90% of Americans want background checks for firearm purchases. And he’s not too inaccurate in that statement. According to PolitiFact, most polls over the past few years say that around 90% of Democrats and 80% of Republicans support background checks.
So what’s the problem?
I have a tremendous amount of respect for firearms and firearm safety. It was drilled into me repeatedly as a sailor and small arms instructor.
To even touch a weapon in boot camp, I had to have a background check and go through extensive training. And even then, I was only issued weapons when it was required, like if I was on watch or performing boarding team duties.
I haven’t shot a firearm since I left the military. I’ve traded in rifles and pistols for cameras and lenses. I don’t have a fear or hatred of firearms, probably due to years of training. But I also don’t fetishize them or feel a need to go out and purchase one. I will admit that they are fun to shoot once in a while. I don’t know why, it probably activates something in my dumb monkey brain.
Firearms themselves aren’t scary. What is scary is when an 18-year-old can just purchase one of these weapons on a whim and shoot up an elementary school. No background checks. No training. Just have the cash and you’re good to go. At 18. You can’t buy a beer in the United States when you’re 18. You can’t buy cigarettes when you’re 18.
But you can buy a weapon and shoot children.
Does this make any sense to you?
Sticklers always revert back to the same argument, pointing to the Constitution of the United States, and in particular, the Second Amendment:
"A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
“Right to bear arms!” has become a rallying cry. Yet they never mention the first part of the Amendment. The part that says A well-regulated militia. Did a well-regulated militia go and shoot up a school in Uvalde? Shoot up a grocery store in Buffalo?
U.S. Marine Corps photo by Staff Sgt. Ezekiel R. Kitandwe [Released].
Hell, even as I write this article, there’s been more news of mass shootings. Tulsa. Charleston. Chattanooga. It’s exhausting to even try and keep up. They’re so common now that news of them fades quickly.
We need to arm teachers! An illogical argument made by 2A (Second Amendment) groupies. Teachers aren’t in the military. Teachers didn’t sign up to become teachers to wield guns. They became teachers to teach. Avery Gardiner, co-president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said “If having more guns in more places made Americans safer, then we would have the lowest rates of gun violence in any developed country in the world, and the exact opposite is true.”
We need armed veterans at every school! Another illogical argument, if you give it even a few minutes of actual thought. Will these veterans going to be volunteers? If not, will they be paid? If so, who will pay them? Do you know how many schools are in the United States? Do you want to give veterans an objectively boring job with zero chance of advancement?
I’m not going to pretend that writing this article will change anyone’s mind. At this point, whatever camp you fall into, you’re probably dug in. I’m also not going to pretend I have all the answers. I’m just a dumb veteran who knows how to use Google and has an associate’s degree.
All I know is what I observe. And what I see is people dying. Children who are getting shot.
And nobody seems to really care enough to do anything about it.
Alben Osaki is a photojournalist and filmmaker residing in South Texas, with a focus on the outdoors.
