Congress Faces Battle Against Time To Force Gun Control

Surrounded by mayday calls of ambulances running in cities across the US, federal government’s failure to restrain the use of guns, once again claimed lives in Texas and Ohio.

Still buzzing loud inside our ears are the screams of people dying or narrowly escaping deaths. Ironically, as the numbers pile up to showcase the history of innocent deaths, it is also worth noting that 25 years have passed since a powerful law actually restricted the gun spread menace.

The law known as the Federal Assault Weapons Ban was written into legislation in 1994, but it came with a deadline of 10 years, ending 2004. However, during its span of implementation, the law essentially banned manufacturing, sale and possession of some military-style assault.

Post expiry of act, there were numerous attempts made to renew it, drastically failing with Senate always voting otherwise. In the following years, including recent attacks in Ohio and Texas, the massacre has spread like a wildfire, failing to register anything significant.

Every attack that puts lives to rest is followed by another debate that argues to find a solution. Fighting over the split caused over background checks, both sides of the house have remained stalled on their notions.

In February, the US House of Representatives passed the gun-control legislation. However, hardly did the bill made an impact. While some House Republican's joined Democrats in favor of the gun-control, but the efforts only cried foul. With more than 290 people killed in 268 mass shootings this year, America still vows to move nowhere.

Condemning attacks cannot solve the recurring problem neither can paying tributes on social media. The need of the hour is to find a real solution and Democratic presidential candidate, Bete O' Rourke, speaking to resolve the conflict said that democracy offers no luxury to sideline any violation. If it’s gun violence or any other existing issue, every problem requires a proper solution. But, where is the answer anyway.

Inaction in Congress has raised worries, and if Democrats put it on background checks, Republicans have got the liberty to blame it on Democrats not willing to negotiate. The issue of owning a gun in US is dire. The nation with its enormous armed civilian strength, has sown preliminary roots of chaos.

Besides, the proposal to restrict who should actually have the liberty to pick up the gun has its own benefits, but that still doesn't completely eradicate the problem. Background checks can certainly mirror people of the restricted class, but the clause fails to tackle with firearm homicides that involve use of a handgun.

Even if a red flag law could help law enforcement to seize the guns from dangerous people, the action is only possible after a red flag is raised, which is often too late to control the situation.
The root of the issue is not controlling the policies, but the ownership of a weapon, which is not really challenging. With America, the concept of having a gun is totally unique, because it has the power to sway even a normal argument into an armed conflict.

To change the present situation, US Democrats need to think above certain restrictions on weapons. They need to focus on formulating the policies that directly confront the issue, impose a prominent ban on certain category of firearms and also work aggressively towards a solution. Besides, Republicans should not always blame such situations on the Democratic ideology, but rather come up with something more prominent than just shunning the violent acts.