Gun control debate after Parkland shooting

The recent spate of mass shootings in USA has triggered yet another round of debate for gun control, with people on both ends of the line weighing in with passionate arguments. While NRAs deep pockets are unlikely to allow a change in the laws anytime soon, the Parkland (FL) survivors are not the only ones who are bringing some first-hand perspective into what guns in public domain do to us.

As it transpired, the suspect Nikolas Cruz, all of 19 years old, could legally purchase AR-15, a semi-automatic version of the assault rifle which was originally designed as an automatic weapon for the armed forces. Not only does it inflict consistent, heavy damage, it is also easy to reload, lightweight, and makes for an excellent combat weapon. It is these very qualities however, which make it a devastating weapon in civilian domain. Why a civilian might need a weapon of such destructive power, is just one of the many baffling aspects. The other, being the fact that purchasing a smaller weapon with higher accuracy (or lower chance of unrestricted fatality) - and consequently a better firearm for self-defense – would have required Cruz to be at least 21 years old!

Now, the physicians treating the injuries from military issue rifles are weighing in, stating how the trauma inflicted is disproportionaly high, especially for civilians who aren’t trained or prepared to endure such. The lighter bullets of AR-15 ensures higher velocity, as well as turn on impact (also known as ‘yawing’) to painful soft-tissue damages, and splintering of bones. Lack of a metal jacket (or hollow-point ammunition) – mandatory in military versions – means the bullets themselves could splatter on impact, causing ghastly wounds akin to shrapnel wounds in combat victims. Not only does it result in a wider wound channel, but also cause incredible agony and pain.

Psychological impact of merely having to witness such grievous injuries could be immense. Doctors who treated survivors from the Texas church shooting (2017) and Parkland, FL survivors, recount how the wounds would remind them of wounded soldiers from their times as army surgeons. The laceration of soft tissue, bones exploding into shards, limbs hanging about in unnatural angles, and exit wounds upto a foot wide (!) are just some of the extreme aftermaths of encountering a military-issue weapon capable of high-velocity bullet wounds. Even bullets which don’t hit a bone, could potentially send shockwaves through tissues, muscles, cause multiple organ damage, rip open blood vessels, and often cause lasting damage and disability.

Handgun bullets, nearly a third slower in air-speed and heavier, are likelier to be slower down by the body, as well as hurt only in their line of projection. Even a decade or two ago, those formed majority of civilian firearm injury victims, while the ghastly wounds were from the battlefield. Most of the surgeons agree though, that the stats have rapidly changed, and they have been struck by the rise in traumatizing wounds the modern rifles can cause, and their increasing presence in civilian shootings. For anyone exposed to them, emotional brunt endured from having to witness the sheared organs and punctured body parts seldom allows ‘moving on’…

#parkland #shooting #guncontrol #gunrestrictions #weaponsrestrictions