The recent ban on assault weapons and large magazines has stirred up some serious discussions. Is it necessary for a normal American citizen to have access to weapons the military uses to defend this country? We don’t think so.

A simple handgun with a round or two is enough to protect your family, yourself and your home in emergencies. So why are people buying and building guns that can shoot 100 rounds at a time? Sounds a little extreme doesn’t it?

Gun owners would argue that people need to be prepared for all situations including the unlikely zombie apocalypse. Just a little too much Walking Dead, no?

Vermont is a state that widely participates in hunting; which again brings us back to the first question. Is it necessary to shoot animals with an assault weapon that shoots off a 50 bullets at a time?

Overkill, literally.

In lieu of the recent shooting in Newtown, Conn., we can see the down side of owning and having access to assault weapons but the other side of this argument might be that if someone in the school was able to carry a gun, they could’ve stopped or at least minimized this occurrence.

The discussion divides; Do tragedies mean we should make gun laws stricter or in contrast, should decrease the severity of gun restrictions to protect ourselves?

We don’t live in a third-world country where it is necessary for survival to have military grade weapons to protect and defend our community, so why is it that people are able to get their hands on these things so easily?

The final argument would be that there are still ways to get around the ban of assault weapons and excessive amounts of ammunition so why even bother banning it? President Obama had to take a stance towards the situation with all the recent shootings and this seems like the best way to go. Although it may not fix the problem, hopefully, greater restrictions on higher-powered guns and their ammunitions might at least contain it.