In the aftermath of the horrific Winfield murder-suicide that claimed the lives of four children, neighbor Lisa Spoon did what citizens are supposed to do in a democracy. She contacted her elected representatives and asked them to consider changes to state law that would prohibit convicted felons from purchasing firearms. Instead of a thoughtful response, she received a dismissive one from Rep. Rick Wilborn (R-McPherson).

“You folks never miss an opportunity, to promote your gun shaming hypothesis,” Wilborn replied. “More people are killed by illegals with a criminal record. Please spare me.”

The exchange revealed a troubling assumption that has come to dominate political conversations about firearms: that any discussion of gun safety must be an attack on gun owners.

But Kansans themselves tell a very different story.

Too often, public debate portrays firearm policy as a choice between two opposing camps: people who support gun rights and people who support gun safety. That framing may generate political headlines, but it does not reflect reality. For many Kansans, including many gun owners, the two values go hand in hand.

Spoon herself owns firearms and she made clear that she was not advocating confiscation or the elimination of gun ownership. She simply wanted a conversation about how to prevent similar tragedies from occurring in the future.

Her position is neither radical nor unusual.

The 2024 Kansas Speaks survey, conducted by the Docking Institute at Fort Hays State University, found broad support for several gun-safety measures. Nearly 70% of respondents favored allowing family members to ask a court to temporarily remove firearms from a relative believed to be at risk of harming themselves or others. A similar percentage supported a mandatory three-day waiting period after a firearm purchase. 63% supported allowing law enforcement officers to temporarily remove guns from individuals who pose an immediate threat to themselves or others.

These are not the numbers of a state that rejects every discussion of firearm safety. They are the numbers of a state looking for practical ways to reduce risk while preserving lawful gun ownership.

And there is good reason for Kansans to be concerned. According to RAND Corporation data, Kansas experiences a firearm death rate that is higher than states with similar gun ownership rates. More importantly, that elevated rate is driven primarily not by homicide, but by suicide. RAND’s analysis found Kansas firearm homicide rates have been below states with similar ownership rates, while firearm suicide rates are substantially above it.

That distinction matters because it challenges the way firearm violence is often discussed. When many people hear the phrase “gun violence,” they think of street shootings in large cities or high-profile mass shootings on the evening news. But in Kansas, the deadliest firearm threat is often quieter and closer to home: a family member in crisis, a neighbor struggling with their mental health, or a loved one experiencing despair.

Importantly, Kansas remains a state where firearms are common. The Kansas Speaks survey found that nearly 44% of respondents lived in a household with a gun. Yet support for safety measures remains widespread.

That reality challenges one of the most persistent myths in American politics: that gun owners are uniformly opposed to firearm regulations of any kind.

Many are not.

Many gun owners understand that rights and responsibilities are inseparable. They teach firearm safety to their children. They lock up their weapons. They recognize warning signs when someone is in crisis. And they understand that keeping guns away from dangerous individuals during moments of acute risk is not the same thing as taking guns away from law-abiding citizens.

Kansas voters appear more nuanced than our political discourse allows.

Reasonable people will disagree about which policies are most effective. That debate is healthy and necessary. What is not healthy is dismissing concerns before the conversation even begins.

The lesson from Winfield is not that every Kansan should hold the same view on gun policy. The lesson is that we should stop pretending there are only two sides. Many Kansans support both responsible gun ownership and commonsense safety measures. Our elected officials should recognize that reality and engage with it respectfully.

Because gun owners want safe communities, too.

— Alexandra Middlewood is an associate professor and chair of the Political Science Department at Wichita State University.