This is a tough one. It’s tough because there are so many levels of emotion involved. It’s tough because there are so many highly personal issues tangled up in the topic – everything from constitutional rights to mental health to polar opposite lifestyles and traditions.

​

It’s tough because people die. It’s tough because the people who die have people who deeply love them. Innocent children get murdered in cold blood just for going to school. Innocent people in Las Vegas get murdered in cold blood just for going to listen to their favorite music.  Innocent families get murdered in cold blood for shopping at Walmart on a beautiful Saturday morning. 

​

It’s tough because we all want to get this right. It’s tough because we all want these tragedies to end. But here is where we must be exceedingly careful. For us to get these tragedies under control, the comprehensive strategy we design must be based on facts, not on emotion. 

​

After a murderer uses an assault rifle in a mass shooting, for example, it makes sense that the conversation turns to banning automatic assault weapons. After all, the shooter used an automatic assault weapon to kill these innocent men, women and children, so it stands to reason that, without him having access to it, these people would still be alive.

​

But is that true? Would he have just used another kind of gun, or another type of weapon? It’s impossible for emotions not to play a major role in this issue, but the danger of relying on emotional logic alone is that the chances increase that we make a quick judgement without understanding the complexity of the overall challenge.

​

In so many issues, a solution that makes us feel better in the moment may not necessarily be the best solution for the long-term. Often, solutions that make us feel better in the moment only serve to give us a false sense of security that makes us feel like we are making a difference when we may not be. It’s critical we do not make that mistake with this issue because the stakes are far too high.