More Guns and Less Mental Health Resources Won't Save Children

Dec 28, 2025, 2:30 AM
Image for article More Guns and Less Mental Health Resources Won't Save Children

Hover over text to view sources

As a lifelong gun owner, I have witnessed the devastating consequences of untreated mental illness. My experiences have shaped my belief that simply increasing access to firearms while simultaneously cutting mental health resources is not a viable solution for protecting our children from gun violence.
I fired my first gun at the age of seven and have owned several since. I understand the responsibility that comes with gun ownership, and I have always stored my firearms safely. However, I have also seen the cost of untreated mental illness firsthand. I have looked into the hopeless eyes of veterans suffering from severe PTSD, who are often returned to firearms without the necessary care and support they need.
The personal toll of mental health crises is profound. I lost my father to suicide when I was just nine years old, and I later attempted to take my own life at twelve. Today, I work with families whose children are grappling with grief, trauma, and unmet needs. I am not anti-gun; rather, I advocate for trauma-informed safety measures that prioritize mental health support over punitive policies.
The science is clear: early identification and stable support systems can significantly reduce suicide and violence rates. When lawmakers cut mental health funding and propose more concealed carry options on campuses, they are not promoting safety; they are engaging in what I call policy malpractice. This approach is not only scientifically flawed but morally bankrupt as well.
Children are dying from gun violence at unprecedented rates. In 2020, nearly 46,000 people died by suicide in the United States, with a significant number of these deaths involving firearms. The economic burden of gun violence is staggering, costing the nation approximately $557 billion annually, which includes medical costs, lost productivity, and quality-of-life losses for victims and their families.
The current legislative trend of increasing gun access for young adults, particularly those experiencing high levels of stress and mental health challenges, is alarming. It is essential to recognize that the brains of young adults are still developing, and their decision-making capacities are not fully formed. When we arm individuals who are already struggling, we are not preventing violence; we are exacerbating the crisis.
Moreover, the argument that more guns will lead to greater safety is fundamentally flawed. The presence of firearms in dysregulated systems, combined with a lack of mental health support, will only increase the likelihood of tragic outcomes. We cannot expect that fewer therapists and more guns will create a safer environment for our children.
As a clinician, I understand the complexities of mental health and the importance of providing adequate resources for those in need. We must invest in mental health care, expand access to support services, and create trauma-informed educational environments. This is not about criminalizing mental health issues or stigmatizing those who seek help; it is about saving lives.
The truth is that we have the knowledge and the science to address this crisis, but we lack the courage to implement meaningful change. We must prioritize mental health resources over the proliferation of firearms if we are to protect our children from preventable deaths.
In conclusion, the solution to gun violence lies not in arming more individuals but in stabilizing our communities through mental health support and education. We must build a society that values life and prioritizes the well-being of our children over the expansion of gun rights. If we continue down the path of increasing access to firearms while neglecting mental health resources, we will only continue to bury our children.
We have a choice: we can either tell the truth about the need for comprehensive mental health support or continue to pretend that more guns will keep our children safe. The time for action is now. We must invest in mental health care, strengthen community supports, and ensure that our children have access to the resources they need to thrive.
Amy Rich Crane is a pediatric trauma professional, public health advocate, and gun owner from Epping.

Related articles

Trump Administration's Rural Health Aid Insufficient for Arizona

The Trump administration allocated $67 million in rural health aid to Arizona, significantly less than the $100 million average for other states. This shortfall comes as Arizona's rural areas face higher mortality rates and potential Medicaid cuts, raising concerns about the sustainability of health care in these communities.

US Regulation Could Block Asylum on Public Health Grounds

A new regulation finalized during the Trump administration allows the US to deny asylum based on public health concerns related to communicable diseases. This regulation, which takes effect soon, has drawn criticism from advocates who argue it could be misused to further restrict asylum access.

Idaho Supreme Court Dismisses Medicaid Mental Health Contract Lawsuit

The Idaho Supreme Court has dismissed a lawsuit from Beacon, a bidder for a Medicaid contract to provide mental health services. The court upheld a lower court's ruling, affirming the state's authority in contract awards and preventing losing bidders from challenging such decisions in court.

Congress Must Act to Protect Health Care Access This Holiday Season

As the holiday season approaches, millions of Americans face anxiety over rising healthcare costs and potential loss of coverage. Congress is urged to extend Affordable Care Act tax credits and restore funding for essential health services to ensure that healthcare remains accessible and affordable for all.

U.S. Signs Health Agreements with Nine African Nations

The US has signed health deals with nine African countries, reflecting the Trump administration's priorities. These agreements aim to reduce aid while promoting self-sufficiency and mutual benefits, marking a significant shift in US foreign health assistance.