What is it going to take for people to admit that we need tougher gun laws?

Two guns killed 33 people and wounded 15 last Monday. Two guns unleashed the horror, bloodshed and grief. And those guns were bought legally.

Cho Seung-Hui had three forms of ID, money and no criminal record. Cho’s mental health never came up because Virginia has no waiting period or a background check. Cho walked out with his gun, ready to kill.

Perhaps Virginia Tech could not have been prevented. A madman will find a gun if he really wants one. But the lax gun laws in the United States made it easier for Cho to carry out his massacre ‘ and that’s the truth.

The United States has a monopoly on school shootings and the highest rates of homicides in the developed world. Certainly guns must have something to do with it. In 2000, the United States had 5.64 homicides per 100,000 people, while Canada had 1.76, England had 1.61 and Japan had 1.10. The other three countries restrict gun ownership significantly. Out of the 40-plus school shootings that have occurred in the past 10 years, more than half took place in the U.S.

Germany was the runner up, with three.

So maybe, just maybe, there would be fewer school shootings in the United States if getting a gun wasn’t as simple as buying a pack of cigarettes.

In gun-loving states like Texas and Virginia you can walk in a store with cash and walk out with a gun ‘ there is no waiting period. Virginia even refuses to adopt the Child Access Prevention Law, which requires parents to keep guns away from children, or the Juvenile Possession Law, which forbids children under 18 from possessing a gun.

As a result, the number of incidents of guns being brought into schools varies from state to state. Illinois, with its ban on all concealed weapons and required registrations of both rifles and shotguns, had 32 cases in the 2000-01 school year. Virginia had 204.

I am not arguing for this ‘fundamental right’ to be repealed. But stricter gun laws are long overdue. A waiting period is a must, a thorough background check is necessary and a psychiatric evaluation wouldn’t hurt.

The Second Amendment is not sacred and our Constitution is not the sum of all wisdom. It is a document from a different era when people had different needs and concerns. After all, I don’t see people singing praise to the three-fifths rule that treated blacks as property.

And yes, some liberties are superior to others.

In a world of thriving democracies and powerful law enforcement, the Second Amendment does not apply. We live in a modern world, so perhaps we should not bow to the gun principles of 1787.