Bullets over Las Vegas

It is not just an “act of pure evil.” No. The president of the United States, Donald Trump, is wrong to pigeonhole the recent massacre in Las Vegas, where 59 people lost their lives and 527 were wounded after Stephen Paddock, a 64-year-old white U.S. citizen, opened fire from his 32nd floor room at the Mandalay Bay hotel on thousands of people below enjoying a country music festival.

I point out his nationality, race and age because they are important factors when it comes to Trump. Surely, if the shooter had been a young, Latino immigrant, Trump would have used it as a pretext to double down on his infamous wall and the rhetoric against the “bad hombres.” But no — the killer is someone that Trump considers to be one of his own, but who committed the worst mass shooting in the history of the country.

Paddock was a retired accountant, without a criminal record, who often visited Las Vegas to gamble and go to concerts, and who liked to travel on cruise ships and eat burritos from Taco Bell. He lived in two cities with the same name: Mesquite, Texas, and Mesquite, Nevada. The only thing left to add is “Republican,” but that is still unknown.

Nevada has some of the loosest gun laws, without any limit on the number of guns one can buy and permitting open carry in public. Only the most basic requirements must be met: one must be at least 18 years of age to buy rifles, 21 years of age for handguns, and the buyer must have no criminal record. The killer met all of the requirements, and was able to buy more than 10 firearms and bring them to his hotel room.

After nearly 100 days in office, Trump was the first U.S. president to participate in a National Rifle Association convention since Ronald Reagan. During the convention, he promised to “never infringe on the right of the people to bear arms. Freedom is not a gift from government, freedom is a gift from God.” Trump finished up by saying, “You have a true friend in the White House.”

Each time there is another shooting, it is impossible not to make the connection between access to firearms and the attacks themselves. They overlap. But apparently for some people like Trump, the relationship isn’t so clear. They keep thinking that freedom is owning and carrying a weapon. Major arms manufacturing and production increase after shootings because demand rises. According to the experts, this happens because many people fear that gun legislation will tighten, so they buy more.

Mexicans should let the U.S. serve as an example; having a gun does not make you more free. On the contrary. If we are already an extremely violent society with shootings and instability, giving any Tom, Dick or Harry access to obtaining a gun, so long as he is of age and without a criminal record, would undoubtedly unleash even more events similar to that which place at the beginning of this year in the Colegio Americano del Noreste in Monterrey, when a 15-year-old student killed his teacher with a firearm, wounded three classmates, and ultimately killed himself.

Programs such as voluntary gun buy-backs work. There are also programs that overshadow and prevent initiatives like that of PAN Sen. Jorge Luis Preciado, who wanted to allow carrying firearms in shops, homes, and cars. Now, it is necessary to enforce current laws and improve border controls to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. That is the big task ahead for authorities regarding weapons in Mexico.