A shooting occurred at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida on Valentine’s day. This shooting ended with 17 dead and the shooter in custody. In its wake, the focus has shifted from the shooting itself to discussing how to preventing them from happening.

Students, parents and politicians have been giving their opinions on how to stop these shootings. While everyone is giving their opinion on how to stop the violence, those same people are also marginalizing the people on the other side of the aisle within the same breath. That is where the problem lies. People have become so tribal in their ideas that no discussion can occur without the conversation filling up with vitriol and hate. There needs to be an understanding of what someone is truly arguing for without the other side misconstruing it as something else. For this, there needs to be a breakdown of both sides, starting off with pro-gun reform.

When someone says they are pro-gun reform, the topic of banning ArmaLight rifles or semi-automatic assault weapons is usually what comes next. While a gun reform advocate is chanting this, it is striking fear into those who support the Second Amendment. Saying a blanket term like that goes against what the Supreme Court has ruled in Heller v. D.C. that makes gun-owning Americans scared of losing their right to bear arms.

For context, the Heller v. D.C. answered the question whether the right “keep and bear arms” applied to individuals not in a well-regulated militia. In regards to this case the Supreme Court sided with Heller, concluding an individual has the right to keep and bear arms. In the explanation of the ruling, the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia wrote, “Thus, the most natural reading of “keep Arms” in the Second Amendment is to “have weapons.”

With those rulings, gun reform advocates must shift their position from a gun ban and instead toward different types of screenings that are required to buy a gun. Currently, there are FBI background checks done on people wanting to buy a weapon. These background checks look at criminal and mental health history of a person.

Therein lies the problem with the current background checks though. A clean mental health history doesn’t equate to someone being mentally stable. To make sure that a person is stable, a psychiatric exam could be mandated in order to qualify for a firearm purchase.  This argument avoids the minefield that is outlawing certain types of weapons and instead focuses on something most Americans can agree on, the importance of mental health.

For those who are pro-Second Amendment, understand that gun reform activists most likely don’t know a lot about the Second Amendment. Reformists most likely don’t know the reasoning behind the Second Amendment or the process that goes on when buying a gun.  To see this firsthand, look toward the host of CNN Tonight, Don Lemon, explaining how he bought an automatic weapon in 20 minutes.

It’s crazy Lemon was able to do that, especially since automatic weapons have been banned in the United States since 1994 when the Federal Assault Weapons Ban was passed. Later, in the same segment, Lemon explains how a semi-automatic is an automatic in his eyes. Lemon is an example of somebody who fears the idea of guns but doesn’t understand guns themselves.

To convey the pro-Second Amendment side, there must be an explanation of why the Second Amendment was established and why it is important today. Without either of those, an average uniformed person only knows the Second Amendment gives Americans the right to own and carry guns.

The Founding Fathers included the Second Amendment to ensure Americans had the right to bear weapons in order to protect themselves, not only in regards to their life but also their freedom. Founding Father and third President Thomas Jefferson said, “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”

After explaining the purpose, explain what the Second Amendment has done for people throughout the years. The sad reality of the world is someone who wants to harm others will find a way to do it. Since there will always be people looking to harm, potential victims must have a way to tip the scale in their favor. Guns do exactly that. Guns offer those who are preyed upon and victimized a way to fight back and not be defenseless. With the Second Amendment, citizens have been able to protect themselves and others from would be crimes. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found in 2013 that annually defensive gun use is anywhere from 500,000 case to three million, stopping crimes in the process.

Explaining both the history and the impact of the Second Amendment makes the idea of people owning weapons significantly less “scary” and helps clear up any misconceptions a gun reform advocate has about gun ownership in America.

When people make their points clear and are open for their positions to shift, change is bound to occur. Admitting that an opinion is not as strong as once believed is not a weakness but a virtue. A middle ground does exist on the topic of gun control but the only way to find where it’s located is by listening to other citizens to find the common ground. It is important to stay open minded and listen to all sides and read all the facts before coming to a conclusion. Without that, no policies will ever change. Without that, more shootings are bound to happen.

To understand one’s political expression limits, the American Civil Liberties Union is offering online training for anyone that has a desire to know their rights and limitations of the First Amendment. Their live training is scheduled for 7 p.m. Thursday, March 1. This sort of training is very important in order to utilize the First Amendment properly to articulate other rights ­– like gun laws – for the training event at https://go.peoplepower.org/signup/students-know-your-rights-training-registration.