Unfortunately, this is not the first event of its kind, and it won’t be the last. Americans have the power to change laws for the safety of others, but for some reason our gun laws haven’t been changed since the Gun Control Act of 1998.

The Newtown incident happened for several reasons, the main being the ownership of multiple guns. To me, it seems absolutely ludicrous to own three high-powered guns, but this idea opens up a good talking point: Why would anybody own guns of that caliber?

I can’t answer this for everyone; I can only state my opinion. I do not think people should be able to own guns that are that powerful. It just does not make sense. There are no practical uses. This brings me to my point: I believe that all high-powered rifles, handguns and explosives should be outright banned. Furthermore, there should be a limit placed on the number of low-powered guns one resident or household can own.

You may be asking yourself why we would ever do this. Well, take a look at England, for example. England has outright banned all automatic, and most self-loading, firearms, all of which came into effect in 1987 after Michael Ryan’s massacre of 16 people. England also has tight regulations and limitations on breech-loading handguns, firearms that use cartridges loaded into a chamber near the barrel. The result? Historically low crime rates.

This brings me to my second point: Guns should be more controlled. Period. We should make it harder for individuals to obtain guns by creating stronger and more frequent background checks and encouraging alternative ways to protect yourself or others such as martial arts or Rape Aggression Defense (RAD). Both of these methods of self defense do not take the lives of others in almost every case.

Furthermore, if you have a severe mental illness, you should not be able to obtain, purchase or use guns without approval from a doctor.

Currently, the federal law states that if you are not deemed fit to own a gun, you are not allowed one. However, according to the Wall Street Journal, this is after a court system declares someone unfit based on mental-health records supplied by the state, which are then sent to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

It pains me to say this, but based on previous events, this seems ineffective. There are still gun-related tragedies happening everywhere.

Law enforcement workers must be strict in their approach to gun control and are not qualified to account for a person’s mental health. I believe a doctor’s approval of gun ownership would work much better than that of the FBI. Doctors would have a better understanding of how stable a person is.

In addition, the federal government has also looked into banning firearms and certain ammunition, restricting firearm acquisitions and expanding the waiting period after a firearm acquisition. However, the Center of Disease Control found that there was insufficient data to determine this program’s effectiveness.

Here in Massachusetts, we have much stricter laws. According to the Gun Control Act of 1998, all gun owners in Massachusetts are required to obtain a gun license before purchasing firearms or ammunition. Local police departments or state departments will issue a license only after a potential gun owner passes a state-approved gun safety course.

Sure, it’s easy to say that nobody should have guns. I honestly think that this would be the solution to a majority of gun problems, but I know this solution is not a likely possibility and will not happen any time soon. Americans love their guns for some reason or another. Somewhere along the line of history, America became synonymous with guns.

There is the common saying “guns don’t kill people; people kill people,” but the gun is still there and is still tempting. Let’s take away the temptation once and for all.