In the wake of the devastating tragedy in Las Vegas, the morality of the implementation of new gun control laws looms larger than ever. Some action must be taken, though the “right” course of action, pursued by legislators and voters alike, is unclear, buried beneath statistics and rights that some refuse to give up. It is my suggestion to view the issue through the Greatest Happiness framework, which asserts that what makes an action “right” or moral is it’s capability to produce pleasure. However, in this instance, certain pleasures are positioned to compete against one another, forced by the fundamentally different views of supporters and opponents of enforcing stricter gun control.
On the one hand there is the happiness that comes from owning and keeping firearms for protection. Supporters of lax gun control laws argue that the laws in place are adequate; perhaps stricter screening on those who purchase guns will ultimately prevent gun violence. They argue that anything more is a breach of their second amendment right to bear arms. This loss of a right infringes on happiness, as they lose the freedom to ensure self-defense should they be presented with the need to use a firearm. On this end of the debate, there is a legitimate belief that protecting one’s rights produces happiness.
Here, I must present a few statistics in order to make it easier to frame the issue of gun control legislation in a way that truly captures the meaning of “Greater Happiness.” First, a mere twenty-two percent of the American population owns guns. This is a significant minority compared to the remaining seventy-eight. It would seem then, that since such a marginal portion of the population seeks happiness and protection through the ownership of guns, that the rest of the population would be left alone, to the pleasure and happiness that they derive from staying away from firearms. But in 2015, there were 374 mass shootings. There were 64 school shootings. What I aim to expose with these numbers is that the happiness that twenty-two percent of the population seeks through gun ownership is without question, taking away from that of the remaining SEVENTY-EIGHT percent of the population who remain at the mercy of those who own or wish to not restrict firearms.
Which brings me to the issue of quantity and quality of happiness. One of the biggest indicators that stricter gun laws would result in the Greater Happiness is simply that more people would benefit from them. More people would be safe from mass shootings and homicide, the latter of which, the United States leads at a rate that is 25 times that of the next 22 countries. Thus, happiness achieved by the majority of the population is quite literally the “Greater Happiness.” And what of the remaining minority of the population that must then abandon their happiness? It is my firm belief that sacrifices made in the name of the greater happiness and utility are sacrifices that are not made in vain. It is perfectly moral to ask a minority to give up some happiness for the just cause of upholding the happiness of those in the majority. To this end, legislation must be passed that restricts gun ownership.