In 1913, according to statistics compiled by the National Safety Council, 33.38 people died for every 10,000 cars on the road.

A hard statistic that, if weighed with today’s population, would signify more than 900,000 road deaths per year.

Gratefully, that is no longer the case.

Improvements in car design and road conditions, as well as regulation of speed limits, mandatory seatbelt requirements, pre-emptive licensing tests and revocation penalties for poor behavior, all contributed to a drastic drop in car death rates. In fact, the automotive industry is now one of the most regulated industries in the world.

In 2021, 1.66 people died for every 10,000 cars on the road. Overall, a definitive and long-lasting improvement. But some might ask, why was this effort undertaken at all?

Naturally, we all know the answer - to lower the amount of unnecessary deaths. Common sense, really. Yet, if we were to apply the mindset of many in the current gun community, those 900,000 deaths simply would be the price we pay for the freedom of the open road. I mean, why speed limits or seatbelt requirements or licensing tests? Why any regulation at all? Isn’t that freedom?

In answer to this, former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia noted in his 2008 Heller decision, “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited ... it is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever, in any manner whatsoever, and for whatever purpose.” In short, the amendment prescribes regulation as part and parcel of its intent.

Of course, that has not been the view of the current gun community. A view forged by decades of illicit marketing practices created to sell assault-style weapons. In 1994, according to estimates, there were approximately 1.5 million assault-style weapons owned in the United States.

Following the lapse of the assault weapons ban in 2004, marketing tactics employed by the gun industry have skyrocketed that number to well above 20 million, and in its wake, created a ten-fold rise in mass shooting deaths. This purposeful flooding of the market has since been offered as a primary reason for inaction. I mean, after having created a monster so large, so the reasoning goes, why bother trying to resolve it at all? It’s kind of the “too big to fail” hypothesis set in reverse. “There are simply too many guns, so let the carnage continue.” Dystopian logic in a nutshell.

The banning and eventual reclamation of all semi-automatic high capacity pistols and rifles would go a long way in resolving this problem. This solution is really the elephant in the room. Everyone understands its long-term effect on impeding the possibility of further gun deaths, but no one wants to admit it.

And so, to those who feel single-action low capacity weapons are not enough to fulfill your desire for fictional adulation, I mean no disrespect. If you feel a civil war is necessary to protect the rights of deceitful gun manufacturers to peddle death and despair to our local communities, so be it. The Confederacy felt much the same way. For those lacking the vision or the wisdom or the courage to care, change may never come. For the rest of us, we recognize what must be done and we must do it.

Paul Wheeler grew up in suburban Chicago and traveled much of the United States before settling in Ottawa, and now Streator. He writes about a variety of topics including art, writers, politics, history, education and environmental issues. He can be reached at newsroom@mywebtimes.com.