On Tuesday, Jan. 21, an armed assailant shot a teaching assistant to death inside a classroom at Indiana's Purdue University. As the facts trickle in on this horrific incident, one thing is certain: far too often, universities, public buildings and governments follow zero-tolerance gun control policies that are fundamentally flawed. To find real solutions to shootings and gun deaths, we must not let emotions cloud our judgment. In the wise words of former United States Secret Service agent Dan Bongino, "In a society of wolves, you do not fight back by creating more sheep."

The facts are undeniable: as a whole, the United States has become safer and less violent each succeeding year. Crime data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation has found that nationwide violent crime rates are approaching historic lows, with the rate of U.S. violent crime declining by 72 percent from 1993 to 2011. Another study by the Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan research group funded by Congress, found that from 1994 until 2009, nationwide gun ownership skyrocketed from 194 million to 310 million, while crime dramatically decreased. The study found that "firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide" fell from 6.6 per 100,000 Americans in 1993 to 3.2 per 100,000 Americans in 2011, meaning that gun murder actually fell as arms ownership rose. 

Yet, with all the evidence, gun control advocates still insist that mandatory, strict laws banning assault rifles, limiting the number of ammunition magazines one can own, instituting universal background checks with governmental databases and more must be put in place to deal with guns and violence after tragedies like those in Newtown, Conn. and Aurora, Colo. However, the truth is that knee-jerk legislation passed by the state governments of Colorado, Connecticut and New York, and which almost passed in the United States Senate in light of these incidents, misses the mark in addressing the reasons behind and solutions for the fewer "firearm-related murder(s)" still occurring in the country. These laws fail to solve the problem, and strip the overwhelming majority of law-abiding Americans of their Second Amendment rights at the same time. 

The reasons behind persistent gun violence and mass shootings are simple: governments and individual institutions that prohibit gun ownership for upstanding citizens inadvertently help criminals to prey on the defenseless. Criminals, by definition, don't follow laws; law-abiding citizens do. The most damning evidence to support this truth is that, as per the findings of economist and gun rights advocate John Lott, every public mass shooting in the United States since 1950, with one anomaly, has occurred in a gun-free zone.
Meanwhile, Europe, which houses some of the world's most draconian gun-control laws, has had three of the six most deadly school shootings. Quite simply, law enforcement is not omnipresent, meaning that victims of gun-related crimes have no way to defend themselves when armed officials aren't there. It's evident, then, that gun-free zones and zero-tolerance gun control haven't been able to keep the most dangerous in our society from attacking the most vulnerable.

America needs to begin effectively addressing the epidemic of gun deaths still occurring in some areas in the country. A good place to start is to uphold gun laws already on the books that keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally unstable. Indeed, according to Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, in 2010, a paltry 44 illegal gun purchase cases were prosecuted by federal prosecutors out of 48,321 total instances. Moreover, under President Barack Obama's administration, gun law violation prosecution fell to a decade low, with a 30 percent drop from a 2004 record peak under the George W. Bush administration, as seen in Syracuse University's Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse Project study. There has been no explanation from anyone as to why these numbers are so low. 

If we cannot depend on incompetent governments to enforce the laws already on the books, how can we ask them to enforce even more gun regulations than before? We must restore the rule of law.

Another positive step legislators across the country can take is to promote, support, and expand concealed carry gun licenses for law-abiding Americans. States that choose this alternative, constitutional path to dealing with guns have seen dramatic results: an 8.5 percent decrease in murders, five percent decrease in rapes, seven percent decrease in aggravated assaults and a three percent decrease in robberies, according to FBI crime statistics. 

Moreover, while cities plagued with high crime rates continue to see mass murders on their streets, some city residents have passed through the piles of anti-gun governmental regulations to obtain concealed carry licenses. This has had a positive impact and should be expanded. In fact, James Craig, the police chief of the crime-riddled city of Detroit, recently came out in support of the expansion of concealed carry on the radio program "The Paul W. Smith Show," stating: "There's a number of [concealed pistol license] holders running around the city of Detroit. I think it acts as a deterrent. Good Americans with CPLs translates into crime reduction." 

Statistics support Craig's claim: a 1985 Department of Justice survey confirmed that three in five felons wouldn't want to confront a victim with a firearm. An armed populace is a danger to the criminal, not the other way around.

While well-intentioned, the emotional rhetoric of gun control advocates must be checked by a logical, thought-out and constitutional approach. The facts show that bad policy fixated on nearsighted, emotional appeals ends up hurting more people than it helps. Politicians and gun control advocates must look to Benjamin Franklin's timeless advice that "they that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
*