After the shooting in Newtown, Conn., America’s view on guns has come under scrutiny.  Polls over the subject show results in favor of gun control.  The Obama administration has been preparing to try to put more laws in place.

The left has suggested things like background checks, mental health checks, and the like.  This starts the country down a road that could lead to absolutely no guns.

This may sound strange, but I think that this is one of two roads we can go down.  The second one is completely opposite.

If there was an armed official in Sandy Hook Elementary School at the time of the shooting, would Adam Lanza have gone in and shot twenty children, six staff members, himself, and his own mother?  Even if he did enter, would he have gotten very far?

If he did get past the armed official, and every teacher had a gun, would he have shot as many people as he did?

These are all questions that need to be looked at objectively, no matter a person’s view on gun control.  If this situation is looked at objectively, one should be skeptical as to whether this incident would’ve still turned out to be one of the biggest shootings in our history if there was an armed official in the school.

Wayne LaPierre, the Executive Vice President of the National Rifle Association, said, “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.”

Although this statement may be overly simplistic and wild west-like, is it not true?  Saying the answer to gun violence is more guns might sound as ridiculous as fighting fire with fire, but not when it is seriously thought about. In so many of our nation’s shootings, it seems that if one or more people with a gun were there, it would’ve turned out different.  Someone could’ve been there to protect the possible victims from the shooter.

Another scenario would to have no guns sold at all.  Although guns can still be purchased illegally, in a world with no legal guns people like Lanza probably wouldn’t get their hands on guns (he got his from his mom, who purchased them legally).  There is a good chance that America wouldn’t have had to deal with any of these shootings in its history because these men couldn’t easily obtain guns, at least not as easily as if guns were legal.

James Holmes, the Aurora, CO shooter, purchased all of his gear legally, even if it was an unregulated online market.  If guns were illegal, it could be said that he could’ve found a way to get his gear illegally.  But do we want it to be that easy for people like him to get a gun in the first place?  He spent $15,000 online on his equipment, which included explosives.  The government did not notice until he walked into that theater.  That is not how it should’ve been.  When someone spends $15,000 on weapons in general, that is a red flag, or at least something worth looking into.

Both options have their appeals, however we obviously must choose one.  There is a fork in the road and both sides have been arguing which way to go for too long.  Whichever way is chosen, we need to go that way now.  No more arguing.  There are too many shootings occurring for the debate to rage on.