Every 15 minutes, someone dies from a gun. Over 40,000 people died last year from guns alone (Mervosh). In fact, the U.S. has the most guns in the world, at around 120 guns per 100 civilians. And even though the U.S. only makes up 5 percent of the world’s population, the U.S. has 40 percent of the world’s guns (O’Connor). Gun violence is something that impacts everyone, and is something that must be addressed now. As guns have become more advanced, and with the increase of mass shootings since 2000, politicians must address and reform gun legislation in order to protect the population (Schmidt).

In examining current gun legislation, it is evident how much more must be done to curb gun violence. No matter who you are, gun violence affects everyone. The politicians who pass the legislation, set the guidelines for who can obtain what type of gun. The ones hit by the bullets, and the general population, feel the repercussions of the gun legislation. Specifically, more legislature must be passed to ensure these dangerous weapons do not get in the hands of the mentally ill. An investigation of gun legislation and mental illness exemplifies how more must be done to regulate the sale and confiscation of guns to the mentally ill because it’s too easy for people to obtain guns, those with mental illnesses are more likely to abuse guns, and too many lives have been taken by gun violence from mentally ill people.

In today’s day and age with such prevalence of gun violence and political discussions regarding guns, it is imperative to determine what is behind gun violence. Following many school and mass shootings in the past years, gun violence has been a popular debate topic. As many of the past shootings were specifically from kids struggling with mental illnesses, the question arises of how to combat those who are mentally ill and have guns. In order to protect not only the mentally ill themselves, but the general population as well, guns must be kept out of the hands of those unstable. In his article, “Mixing Guns and Mental Illness,” Michael Luo argues that it is too easy for people struggling with mental illnesses to get their guns back. He writes how more and more states are allowing mentally ill people, who lost their gun rights, to gain back access to their firearms. Following the massacre at Virginia Tech, more laws have been passed to take away guns from those with mental illnesses. However, Luo points out how states now are also adding laws that would return the guns to those who have had weapons confiscated. The author argues that appealing to gain back weapons can lead to courts giving back people their guns after they are deemed stable enough and not a threat to others. It is often hard to determine, though, how to know when people are stable mentally, and if it’s worth permanently taking weapons away from those with mental illnesses to ensure the safety of people. Luo then adds what the purpose of the laws originally were and how they’re abused today. He writes how the intent was to let those who have proven to be safe to society to gain access back to their guns. The author additionally states that through closer examination, many vague laws and standards guard the process. Luo emphasizes how these laws are too vague and allow too much room for possible massacres. Although the laws might have good intention, the laws that allow people to regain their guns are not specific enough. Specific examples have shown how easily these laws can and have been abused, as mentally unstable people have been able to gain guns back even though they are a threat to not only others but to themselves as well. Stricter laws would keep weapons out of people’s hands who are definitely not worthy of having guns. In order to keep everyone safer, guns must be kept out of the hands of those unstable. And while laws have been imposed to combat the issue, the laws themselves are too vague and too easily allow for guns to be put back into the hands of threats. Stricter laws would make it harder for judges to give back the guns to people who have shown to be threats to each other and themselves and ultimately keep everyone safer.

Even as some steps have been taken to reduce gun violence, all states must create clear, strict laws to protect their citizens. Strict guidelines would prevent people from finding loopholes and giving guns back to those who don’t deserve them. Additionally, states must follow the same laws to create a universal guideline that every state can adopt, making sure everyone is on the same page. In his article, “Gun Seizure Laws Grow in Popularity Since Parkland Shooting,” Ryan Foley argues that states must regulate the sales of guns because it keeps everyone safer. He cites how one study in Connecticut found that after tightening gun seizure laws regarding the mentally ill, the amount of gun suicides dropped 10 percent. Foley deliberately argues how the approach of keeping guns out of people’s hands who are unstable has lead to less deaths. Reducing gun ownership in those mentally unstable has shown to reduce the amount of suicides by guns. However, Foley also points out how the current process is still vague and many states don’t currently participate in regulating the guns to the mentally ill. Foley writes how the system of confiscating, petitioning, and gaining guns back is different in every state. He writes how in some states such petitions to confiscate guns can only be filled by police, while in others, family members, employers, and school officials can petition as well. As more states have taken steps into passing laws allowing states and governments to confiscate mentally ill people’s guns, states have differing approaches in doing so. Some states leave it up to the police to handle all matters, while others allow family members to send in petitions to take away a person’s guns. The debate, though, is which method is more just and efficient. Leaving it to the police may miss many cases of people showing threatening signs, but leaving it up to individuals to report others, leaves room for people to unjustly report others. People could begin to report others possibly if they hold grudges or they have a dislike for gun ownership. As more laws continue to be passed, states must decide how to efficiently go about with their petitions. To create the most safe and efficient system, states must come together as a whole having everyone participate in the legislative process to protect civilians. By first creating clear guidelines and then act upon the laws, not only will gun deaths go down but a safer community will be created as well.

Seen through many past mass murder incidents, those with mental illnesses are more likely to abuse guns. At the same time, though, it is not saying that the mentally ill are dangerous humans. When comparing the amount of violence committed by the mentally ill as a population versus the general population, statistics have shown that mentally ill people are more likely to commit gun violence. In his article, “Limiting Guns for the Mentally Ill is Complicated,” Benjamin Mueller points out how mass murderers have a much greater rate of having mentally ill disabilities than the general population. In an analysis, he found that out of 350 mass killers since the early 1900’s, around 22 percent had psychosis. However, the percentage in the general population is only around 1 percent. The author argues how prevalent mental health issues are in mass shootings. The staggering part in the statistic is the comparison of psychosis in the killers versus the general population. The importance of it is how these shooters have mental health issues, and maybe that those with mental health issues are more likely to abuse the use of guns. Mueller goes on to state how even with the great statistic showing the prevalence of mental illnesses in mass murderers, some states are doing very little to combat the issue and protect their citizens. While Florida has entered over 100,000 mental health records into the national database, Wyoming has only entered four (Mueller). The accountability lies within the states themselves to submit records to the federal government. The statistic shows the staggering difference in Wyoming vs. Florida in entering mental health records. While Florida does have a much larger population, 140,000 reports versus 4 reports is not a representative comparison. The importance of these reports is that even with the ability to report mental health, some states and places aren’t following through and sending in mental health reports. The fact of the matter is that the mentally ill are much more likely than the general population to abuse guns. To combat the issue states much be accountable in doing their part to not only protect those with mental disabilities but the general population as well. By reporting mental health records into background checks, a safer system will be created as guns won’t go into the hands of those who aren’t deserving of weapons.

Too many lives have already been taken through gun violence by those who are mentally ill, and gun violence cannot be simply put aside anymore by politicians. The fact of the matter is, many people have lost their lives from guns at the hands of the mentally ill. Similar to the statistic in the paragraph above, a study by the LA Times found that among the perpetrators in mass murderings, 61 percent of the killers showed signs of mental health problems. The rate, over 15 times higher than the general population, is something that needs to be combatted now in order to try to stop any more future shootings. Additionally, the New York Times cites how mass murderers, with guns, are 20 times more likely to be mentally ill compared to the general population. As mass murderers are 20 times more likely to have a mental illness, and there is such a small percentage of mental illnesses, the proportionality between mass murders in the general population and in the mentally ill is astounding. Because of the great divide between the mentally ill and the general population, federal or state jurisdiction must be passed to ensure the safety of everyone. Just as gun control is gaining popularity for the general population, the mentally ill are much more prevalent in today’s shootings and must be combated now.

On the other hand, some may say that gun violence is not a mental health crisis but rather to blame because of the amount of guns. While there are a great amount of guns throughout the country, it is not the guns that are killing people. Even with the abundance of guns, the fault lies within those who are pulling the trigger. In his article, “Stop Blaming Mental Illness for Mass Shootings,” Dylan Matthews argues how mental illness is not the problem behind our mass shootings. He writes how if we cured schizophrenia, depression, and many other mental illnesses in the snap of a finger, crime would only reduce by around 4 percent. He argues how little of an impact mental illnesses really have on crimes. While the statistic doesn’t totally relate to the heart of the matter, violence from guns, crime only decreases by a small percent after curing many of the major mental illnesses. However, Grant Duwe emphasize the prevalence of mental health in gun violence, specifically mass murders. As stated in The New York Times, “mass murderers are nearly 20 times more likely to have a severe mental illness than the general population” (Mervosh). Even though the statistic leads some to believe that mental health only plays a role in 4% of violent crime, mental health plays a much greater role in gun violence, specifically mass murders. Also, any reduction in crime is beneficial. In order to curb gun vioelence, steps must continuously be taken to create the safest society possible. And as exemplified by how many murderers have shown signs of mental illness, the only way to stop mass shootings is to take guns out of the hands of the mentally ill.

As someone who has mental illness in my family, I’ve seen from firsthand how someone can change and be effected. My uncle, someone who recently developed schizophrenia, and has always had diabetes, has regular mood swings. These swings are moderated by medicine. However, with such mental illnesses skipping one day’s of mental illness can lead to drastic mood swings. Putting a gun in his hands would not only make him a great threat to others, but to himself as well. And for the sake of everyone’s safety, guns must be kept out of his and others’, who are mentally ill, hands.

Because it is too easy for people to obtain guns, those with mental illnesses are more likely to abuse guns, and too many lives have been taken by gun violence from mentally ill people something must be done now for the sake of everyone. Passing stricter, more specific gun legislature to ensure guns don’t fall into those who are unstable mentally must be done now. The legislations, such as universal laws that disallow mentally ill to gain back firearm access and removing guns’ from people's houses once they are deemed mentally unstable. Something must be done now. If people truly want to create the safest society today, where we decrease substantially the amount of lives taken from guns, and want to create the safest society for future generations, act now. Anyone can act. Call a local politician, write them a letter. And as Ronald Reagan once said, “We must act today in order to preserve tomorrow.”