By Opinions Editor James Wendt

Seemingly forgotten, on Sept. 16, gunshots rang out at the Washington Naval Yard when Aaron Alexis brought 13 lives to an abrupt ending. Alexis followed the pattern of mental illness that has emerged from the mass shootings that have dominated late-night news since the Virginia Tech Massacre by legally obtaining weapons. Before another disturbed shooter takes the lives of more innocent people and more funeral processions take to the streets, we must take action. Now is the time to strengthen the background check system, increase the quality of mental health care, and limit the number of rounds in a single magazine.

In the timeline of mass shootings and the ever-decreasing intervals between attacks, the shooters obtained their guns with approval from Uncle Sam. The proof is astounding. According to CNN, Cho Seung-Hui of Virginia Tech purchased his weapons in accordance to “the letter of law”.  According to ABC News, Jared Loughner, the man who shot U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords and eighteen other victims in 2011, legally obtained the Glock 19 he used in Tucson, Arizona.  According to the Huffington Post, Adam Lanza, the monster who filled 20 small coffins with 20 small bodies at Sandy Hook Elementary, stole weapons from his mother.

Despite the overwhelming evidence that it is far too easy to obtain a firearm in this country, gun rights activists continue to assert that people need access to guns. I am not proposing getting rid of guns completely. Banning guns entirely is both an impossibly unrealistic and unnecessary feat. It is, however, necessary to strengthen the background check system for gun sales.  Alexis,bought the shotgun turned weapon of mass destruction from a store in Virginia, despite a criminal history, according to The Huffington Post. Alexis was involved in two separate incidents where he fired shots: once at car tires and another where he shot through the floor of his apartment. Alexis clearly had a suspicious history involving guns, yet the United States Government allowed him to obtain another. Better screening, longer waiting periods, and mental evaluations are key to stopping maniacs in their bloodstained tracks. Whether an individual should qualify for a gun license needs to be a conversation between various sources, including police, mental health professionals, and gun experts. Applying for a gun license should be a process that delves deeper into an individual’s past beyond the limited application process. A record of legal and mental history must become a deciding factor when allowing someone to buy a gun. The single page of questions that is the existing prerequisite is an insufficient requirement. Ideally, through an improved system, red flags would have warned us of Alexis’ intentions. Though it is possible that Alexis and other shooters would have still gotten guns after a more extensive process, it does not excuse our lawmakers from not trying to limit these madmen.

There is another system that failed the shooters’ victims, as well as the shooters themselves: the mental health care system. Multiple sources have reported that the shooters involved in the aforementioned shootings were mentally ill. From a judge deeming Cho “an immanent danger to himself because of mental illness”, to the schizophrenia that overwhelmed Tucson shooter Loughner and the questionable mental stability of Washington Naval Yard gunman Alexis, it is apparent these men lacked the resources to battle their mental illnesses. Those lacking funds for, access to, and quality in mental healthcare could be at risk for escalating violence. Treatment is essential to detecting warning signs and stopping the ticking time bombs that are future shooters. While psychiatric treatment could help train potential gunman to cope with the demands of life instead of resorting to violence, unfortunately, there are still exceptions. Many of the past decade’s shooters were mentally ill, but Lanza of Newtown, CT merely suffered from Asperger’s, a non-violent disability on the Autism spectrum.

Lastly, it is imperative to reduce ammunition capacity. This insures that even if the other failsafes of gun legislation and mental health care fail, there would be a last line of defense to keep the list of victims short. Access to excessive amounts of ammunitions is as open as the access to the guns they load. ABC News reports that the man responsible for the theater shooting in Aurora Colorado, James Holmes, “legally bought nearly 6,300 rounds of ammunition, two Glock .40 caliber pistols, a .223 caliber semi-automatic rifle, a 12-guage shotgun, [and more]”. Unfortunately, Holmes’ excessive ammunition count is not unique. The White House reports that, “The case for prohibiting high-capacity magazines has been proven over and over; the shooters at Virginia Tech, Tucson, Aurora, Oak Creek, and Newtown all used magazines holding more than 10 rounds…” Even those who seek guns for self-defense who are law-abiding citizens do not need more than ten bullets to protect themselves from an intruder or assailant. If it takes more than ten shots to get the job done, you should not have a gun. Hunters, too, do not need more than ten rounds in a magazine. Extra ammunition may be necessary for a trip to the shooting range or woods, but reloading speed is rarely applicable to leisure or self-defense.

Although we can never completely eradicate mass shootings, we can treat the epidemic. Tighten gun laws. Strengthen support for the mentally ill. Limit ammunition magazines. We are losing a fight to gun violence without even fighting back. As Joel Benenson and Katie Connolly so eloquently express in an article called “Don’t Know Much About Gun Laws”, “Rules will always be broken. Some people will always cheat on their taxes. Some people will always speed. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have common-sense rules like speed limits or an income tax.” The cries for change can no longer be silenced. We owe it to every man, woman, and child victimized by a triggerman. It is our decision if we will stand behind the man with a gun, or in front of the victims.