Students engage gun debate. Good for them.
This editorial appeared in the Washington Post.
After last year's mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, it quickly became clear that students who had survived the horror weren't willing to let their murdered classmates and teachers become just another statistic in America's unending carnage of gun violence. They demanded change and ignited a grass-roots movement that has given youthful new vigor to the fight for gun safety. Now, these young activists have put forward a bold gun-control proposal that aims to reframe the debate on gun policy.
The ambitious agenda unveiled Wednesday by March for Our Lives, a group led by student survivors of the Valentine's Day school shooting in Parkland, Fla., in which 17 people were killed, comes in the wake of this month's back-to-back mass shootings that killed 31 people in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio. "A Peace Plan for a Safer America" calls for a ban on assault-style weapons and high-capacity magazines, a national licensing and gun registry, a mandatory gun buyback program for assault-style weapons, a rigorous licensing system and other measures to combat not just mass shootings but also suicides and domestic and urban violence.
The plan would go well beyond the modest gun-control measures such as expanded background checks and "red flag" laws that have been the focus of the current debate. Given the difficulty of enacting even those bare-boned safeguards — thanks to the sniffling obeisance of President Donald Trump and other Republicans to the gun lobby — one might wonder if there is a pie-in-the-sky aspect to the students' agenda.
Yet the refusal of these student activists to accept the status quo, and their commitment to instead fight for what makes sense, has already produced results, including modest gun reforms in Florida and other states and the mobilization of young voters that helped Democrats in last year's midterm elections.
The students have now set their sights on the 2020 elections and hope their plan sets the tone for debate in both parties. Good for them.
The Day editorial board meets regularly with political, business and community leaders and convenes weekly to formulate editorial viewpoints. It is composed of President and Publisher Tim Dwyer, Editorial Page Editor Paul Choiniere, Managing Editor Tim Cotter, Staff Writer Julia Bergman and retired deputy managing editor Lisa McGinley. However, only the publisher and editorial page editor are responsible for developing the editorial opinions. The board operates independently from the Day newsroom.
Stories that may interest you
An ugly showdown that ends with a contested reopening will not be good for the tribes or the state.
Assuring all necessary parking is directly across from the museum is not critical. Arguably, it may not even be preferable.
Connecticut distributing pandemic food aid for children to some, but not yet all, eligible households9:21 pm
Proponents of bill ending Connecticut’s religious exemption to vaccines eye special session for vote9:13 pm