The Parkland Shooting is what most would refer to as a “focusing event”, and hope would be the time for change in stricter gun control from the attention its receiving. Moreover, countries such as Canada, Great Britain, and Australia all have fairly strict gun laws in comparison to the United States that were put in place not long after their very own focusing events. The demand for stricter legislation grew after each traumatizing event. In comparison, opponents of gun “control” in the United States view it as the idea that all guns must be confiscated; gun ownership should cease to exist. It is viewed as way to disarm citizens, making them defenseless to those who intend to harm and the government itself. Consequently, due to strong opposing …show more content…
Students, activists, celebrities and other victims of gun violence were present to protest their beliefs and fight for gun control. The mission of March for Our Lives is not aiming to a political debate or issue; it is about school safety: “School safety is not a political issue. The mission and focus of March For Our Lives is to demand that a comprehensive and effective bill be immediately brought before Congress to address these gun issues…What the group wants, essentially, are three commonsense regulations: a ban on assault weapons, a ban on high-capacity magazines and universal background checks on every gun sale.” The mission of March for Our Lives is simple, but banning guns is not the solution they are fighting for. An assault weapon is of any various automatic or semiautomatic firearms, especially an assault rifle. Nikolas Cruz, the Parkland shooter, used an AR-15, a semiautomatic style firearm similar to the M-16 automatic firearm. The argument for a ban for semiautomatic and automatic firearms has been a long one, and now that is gaining more attention for being the weapon of choice in mass shootings, it will only