The March For Our Lives: Considering Both Sides

The March For Our Lives: Considering Both Sides

These past couple of months I have been seeing politics in a very different way.

From being a hardcore conservative Trump supporter, to now an independent, free-thinking American who doesn’t follow any human being with blind loyalty.

This weekend was the March For Our Lives protest, a movement that stood for ending gun violence in America, especially in schools.

As I log onto social media, particularly Twitter, you see the comments between the right vs the left in regards to this march. I see both sides very passionate with their convictions. From the words I read, the comments I am hearing, the messages from both parties are not being articulated accurately and are not being received accurately. This is why there is such a divide in America: because no one wants to work out the issue at hand.

There are false narratives on both sides that are spreading like wildfire when it comes to core issues, especially regarding the Second Amendment.

The more I try and explain that liberals and Democrats don’t want a full gun ban, the more frustrated I get. Yes, there are some who do want to repeal the Second Amendment, but the majority as do not want to invade your homes and take all your guns away. They, as well as many on the right, do not want someone who is mentally ill to be able to purchase a weapon.

After a lot of discussions that I have had in the past few months, I understand why they feel that the NRA is a problem.

It can be a legitimate concern if money from these lobbyists is influencing politicians. It can be a concern that nothing is being done to make it harder to obtain a military-like weapon. This is the message from Democrats and liberals that should be talked about, not the lies of wanting to take all of your guns away.

Those who oppose the left generally feel that banning any weapon infringes on the Second Amendment in the United States Constitution, and that any change to the United States Constitution makes it vulnerable to being obsolete, to allow a tyrannical government to take over. Many say it’s the Second Amendment that keeps the rest of the Amendments intact.

Many who oppose the March For Our Lives protest explain that there is a difference between the AR-15 (the weapon that many want to be banned) and the M16 and other assault rifles. One big difference is the fact that the AR 15 is a semi-automatic compared to the M16 fully-automatic.

The AR-15 is like any regular civilian pistol, it just looks intimidating.

The protesters will argue back that the bullets of the AR-15, and how fast it shoots, is what does the damage compared to most civilian guns. In fact, the creator of the AR-15 intended the weapon to be a combat military weapon when it was created.

As you can see, there are many valid points made on both sides. I think that this issue can’t be fixed overnight. People of both views have to take it down a notch and work on this together. With facts on both sides, I haven’t made up my mind on this issue. However, I support the Parkland kids using their  Constitutional right to free speech to make their voice heard, and I support the Second Amendment and believe that it shall not be infringed.