OUR SAY: Around in circles we go

"It's simple: they are a weapon that should be handled by law enforcement, military, farmers and trained professionals who need them for their job”

What does the average person on the street need a gun for? Picture: SCOTT POWICKScott Powick

EVERY TIME there is a mass shooting in the United States, I think: surely enough people have died for your 'right' to own and shoot a gun?

I am not really anti-gun, I am anti-anyone-can-own-a-gun.

I feel like if you can walk into a Kmart - a place in Australia where people go to buy things they really don't need to solve problems they don't really have - and buy a gun, there is a big problem.

There is a day-by-day breakdown of how many people have died and where by guns across the US in 2017 that is EIGHTEEN PAGES LONG on the Gun Violence Archive website.

On January 1 alone, there are more than 50 deaths related to gun violence. The information may not even include all deaths.

I do think it's pointless to say "well Australia is better because we have stricter gun laws", because we're not.

Our two countries have a very different approach to operating, and that's probably a good thing.

What I can't understand is how people can blatantly say guns are not a problem.

It's simple: they are a weapon that should be handled by law enforcement, military, farmers and trained professionals who need them for their job.

Joe Bloggs down the street does NOT need to have a gun just because he wants one or thinks he 'needs' one. This is another conversation I wish we'd stop needing to have.

Originally published as OUR SAY: Around in circles we go