Guns vs. Mental Health: Fixing the Root Problem

Zion Patriot,

Much of the modern gun control debate is framed around restricting access to firearms. After every mass shooting, we hear calls for bans — bans on certain rifles, so-called “assault weapons,” or “high-capacity magazines.” The underlying assumption is simple: if the weapon is harder to obtain, the violence will diminish.

But that approach skips the deeper question: why are individuals committing these acts in the first place? Until we focus on the why instead of the how, we will never solve the problem.

The uncomfortable reality is that many high-profile shooters have a history of mental health struggles, often compounded by medication, isolation, or lack of access to effective care. By focusing narrowly on firearms, policymakers ignore the root cause. In medical terms, it’s like treating the fever while ignoring the infection.

Banning guns won’t resolve the social and psychological crises that drive individuals to commit violence. If anything, it risks disarming law-abiding citizens while doing nothing to stop a determined killer. The Second Amendment’s guarantee — “shall not be infringed” — was not written with carve-outs for “modest burdens” or exceptions when public officials lose patience with tackling hard issues like mental health.

We don’t outlaw cars because some people drive drunk, even though drunk driving kills nearly as many Americans each year as homicides involving firearms. Instead, we hold offenders accountable, strengthen penalties, and invest in prevention. The same logic should apply to firearms.

A Cultural Breakdown

The problem deepens when we look at what our culture offers to those already struggling. Instead of stability, responsibility, and belonging, we often hand out confusion, medication, and ideology. Young people wrestling with identity are told their bodies are wrong and pushed toward drugs and hormones that cause permanent changes. Social media amplifies division and despair. Political leaders aren’t helping when they promote slogans or wear clothing that trivializes or demonizes already vulnerable groups.

This isn’t compassion. It’s not treatment. And it certainly doesn’t prepare people to live healthy, meaningful lives.

Violence Finds a Way

Even in countries where private gun ownership is heavily restricted or outright banned, violence hasn’t disappeared. Determined killers simply reach for other tools. In the UK, mass stabbings and acid attacks have risen. In France, a truck was used to murder dozens during the Nice terror attack. In Japan, where private gun ownership is nearly impossible, we’ve seen mass killings by arson and homemade explosives.

The pattern is unmistakable: if the person is broken, they will find a way. Banning firearms doesn’t heal the individual — it just shifts the method of attack. The common denominator in every tragedy isn’t the hardware, it’s the state of mind of the person wielding it.

Ban the Disease, Not the Tool

Calls to ban rifles, magazines, or suppressors are politically convenient, but they miss the mark. The violence isn’t born in the barrel of a gun — it’s born in the brokenness of a person. And when that person decides to act, they’ll use whatever tool is available: guns in America, knives in the UK, trucks in France, bombs in Asia. The weapon changes, but the disease remains.

Rather than banning the tool, we should work to ban the disease. That means addressing the root causes: untreated mental illness, toxic social environments, the overmedication of vulnerable individuals, and the cultural confusion we’re sowing in our kids. If we want a safer society, fewer guns are not the answer — we need healthier people.

What If Guns Were Banned?

It’s worth asking: what if America actually banned guns? Would the violence stop?

History — and the rest of the world — says no. In places where firearms are tightly restricted, determined killers have simply turned to other means. The truth is sobering: banning guns doesn’t ban violence. It just shifts it. A society that leaves its citizens defenseless while failing to treat the root causes of violence is a society that chooses appearance over reality, illusion over safety.

And if the U.S. were to attempt a nationwide ban, it would spark black markets, embolden criminals who no longer fear armed resistance, and criminalize millions of otherwise law-abiding citizens. We’ve seen this story before.

During Prohibition, alcohol didn’t disappear — it went underground. Organized crime flourished, violence exploded, and respect for the law plummeted. The ban didn’t cure the problem; it made it worse. In fact, Prohibition was such a failure that it was repealed just 13 years later. A gun ban would follow the same script, but with even higher stakes.

The Myth of the “Assault Weapon”

Another problem with the gun-ban narrative is the language itself. Politicians call for bans on “assault weapons,” but the term has no consistent or technical meaning. It’s a political invention, not a precise category of firearm. In practice, the primary target is the AR-15, even though most crimes in America are committed with handguns.

And the slippery slope doesn’t stop there. Once the AR-15 is banned, the next target would inevitably be semi-automatic handguns. Then, when criminals adapt, the focus would shift to revolvers, shotguns, and rifles. Violence wouldn’t stop — it would simply evolve.

History proves the point. In 1966, the Texas Tower shooter used a bolt-action hunting rifle from a high vantage point, methodically killing and wounding dozens. He didn’t need an AR-15 or a “high-capacity magazine.” He used patience, tactics, and planning — and he was far deadlier than a typical “spray and pray” attack.

The hard truth is that banning categories of guns doesn’t make killers less dangerous. If anything, it risks pushing them toward more deliberate, calculated, and devastating methods.

The Real Path Forward

If lawmakers are serious about preventing violence, the real effort should go toward:

  • Expanding access to mental health services.
  • Ensuring accountability in the prescribing and monitoring of psychiatric medications.
  • Building stronger social safety nets that can identify and support at-risk individuals before they spiral into violence.

New firearm restrictions may make for powerful soundbites, but they do not solve the core issue. Focusing on guns while ignoring mental health is like bailing water out of a leaking boat without ever patching the hole. You might feel productive in the moment, but the boat is still sinking.

Until we confront the mental health crisis directly, banning guns will always be a distraction — not a solution. Guns are not the disease. Broken people are. And until we fix that, no ban will ever keep us safe.

The next time someone suggest we ban guns we should ask them this question, “How does that help them?”

Gun Control Politics