1. Introduction . Vania Leveille And Susan Mizner’S “Aclu:

Political (they pass they the right to do it) I'm fine that they have I not for nor against it.

“Guns don’t kill people, people do.” This is a well known statement that is oftentimes considered true. However, it is not completely true. Someone who is mentally ill may be unable to make logical decisions and the perception they receive of reality may be tainted by the illness. Gun laws pertaining to those suffering mental illnesses should be more restrictive. Weapons such as guns make committing an act of violence, especially when there are multiple victims, much easier. It is difficult to assess the probability of a person to commit a violent act that harms anyone including himself/herself. Therefore, gun laws need be monitored very closely and made more consistent throughout each state in order to prevent violence that could

An unfortunate reality in today’s society is the gross overrepresentation of persons with mental illness in the criminal justice system. According to Teplin (1984), persons with mental illness have been found to be almost twice as likely as individuals without any known mental illness to be arrested for their behavior in similar situations. Furthermore, several other studies have even shown that roughly half of all persons with a mental illness have been arrested at least once in their lifetime (Solomon & Draine, 1995; Walsh & Bricourt, 2003). Although these statistics seem to further support the common belief among many citizens that mentally ill persons are dangerous criminals, research indicates that the mentally ill are more often arrested for nonviolent minor charges (Cuellar, Snowden, & Ewing, 2007). Not surprisingly, a considerable portion of individuals within the criminal justice population have a diagnosable mental illness. According to Ditton (1999), 7% of federal inmates, 16% of state inmates, and 16% of jail inmates have a mental illness. These percentages may be inflated because persons with mental illness tend to spend longer periods of time in custody than those without a mental illness. Perhaps the greatest indication of the brokenness of the system is the fact that there are more mentally ill persons in jails and prisons today than in public psychiatric hospitals (Lamb& Bachrach, 2001). In fact, according to the

d. Your personal philosophy, values or ideology about the balance between civil liberties and national security in the context of an unending war on terror.

After recent tragic events, such as the mass shooting that took place at a musical festival in Las Vegas, Nevada on October 1st, 2017, which left over 50 people dead, and over 500 others injured (Bui, Zapotosky and Barrett), the topic of stricter gun controls in America has become a controversial topic for many people in our society. Those in favor of stricter gun controls believe that by implementing laws that would make it more difficult for the average person to purchase and own guns, the result would be a decreased number of mass shootings and other gun deaths in our country. Typically, with these proposed laws, it is suggested that potential gun owners should be required to undergo mental health screening, in addition to regular background checks to see if the person has a history of any mental illnesses or past crimes. However, reducing the number of mass shootings and other gun deaths in America is not as simple as just implementing new laws.

Since there are more invalid claims than strong ones, it leads me to disagree with Zakaria’s argument. While not everyone should be able to buy a gun due to their mental state, I do not think changes should be so extreme that Americans are not allowed to own guns at

Now, before anyone thinks that I do/don’t advocate certain persons with felonies or mental incapacities having fire-arms, please allow me to put this into perspective: This is about the Framers’ intent regarding the Second Amendment. These other aspects of certain persons being barred create assent/dissent on their own merits of constitutionality. I do not wish to get caught in a debate about those aspects. I maintain my own opinions inre this aspect of the Second Amendment. I will say this: Not all crimes are identical, even though they may be coded alike. Mental illness is a medical issue, and can be treated effectively, to my understanding. Given this exhaustive retinue of discussion, I have concluded that I believe that these

Even though federal law prohibits the sale of firearms to certain individuals with a history of mental illness, history has shown that it’s still too easy for dangerous people experiencing a mental health crisis to obtain firearms. Currently, laws are in place that require licensed dealers (but not unlicensed sellers) to conduct a background check prior to the transfer of a firearm to screen out these and other prohibited purchasers (smart gun laws 2017). I fill like everybody should have to take a test reguardless of there mental state so that government agensies go flag people that are mentally incompetent

Criteria for effectiveness, efficiency, and equitability, as mentioned by Kraft and Furlong, takes in consideration for supporting or opposing H.R. 226. High risk individuals which includes mental illness, incarcerated individuals, individuals who have committed previous crimes with possession of a firearm causes concern for increased barriers of effective, efficient, and equitable care by putting H.R. 226 into practice. Requirement of background check and maintenance of background check registry of Americans who would like to purchase a firearm would result in effort to decrease the number of crimes from firearms. The evaluation of the bill by identifying pros and cons of effectiveness, efficiency, and equitability

This is one of many problems encountered when trying to use the second amendment to regulate firearm obtainment and use. Another example is “Persons with mental illness and/or substance abuse are frequently perceived by the public to be dangerous. This has resulted in an increase in state legislation restricting their ability to purchase, possess, register, obtain licensure, retain, and/or carry a firearm of any sort” (Donna M. Norris, M.D. Thomas Gutheil et ect…) Legislation and many other states have referred to guidelines on a person’s mental illness and whether they would be able to acquire a firearm. The problem with that is that the guidelines vary from state to state. What may also constitute as a serious mental illness in one state, may be minor or minuscule in the next. Another problem is the restriction of certain types of guns and their restrictions to those of a mental illness. “States vary according to whether or not a specific type

The gun laws of the United States have a long history on determining the credentials on purchasing a firearm. The 2nd Amendment is there for a reason for all citizens the right to bear arms. This leads down to the individual States to regulate who can carry firearms and who cannot. From further research, the regulations that the individual states have passed are blow backs to Gun Rights Advocates who support the 2nd Amendment. What the 2nd Amendment does not speak on is those who have been convicted of a crime and whether they still have the same rights and benefits of those who have not. In this essay, several cases dealing with legally gun position, individual states regulations on gun control, what the law says about convicted felons

B. Such prevention factors can be especially important for people who know they have a family history of mental illness.

One of the most relevant and controversial topics being talked about in the U.S., is with regards to what rules should be implemented towards gun purchasing based on the number of incidents occurring that involve gun use. For this assignment, I chose to focus on how the public’s opinion has changed throughout time with regards to having a gun permit before purchasing a gun. The question asked was, “Would you favor or oppose a law which would require a person to obtain a permit before he or she could buy a gun?” I explored the amount, in percentages, of individuals that favored or opposed such law over a period of five decades, the amount of male vs female opposing or favoring the law, as well as the different race/ethnicities that favored or opposed the law. In the images shown below, you will see how the number of individuals that opposed the law and those who favored it, had noticeable changes throughout decades.

When analyzing and creating new policy for gun control in the United States, there are many conflicting areas. One problem being the conflicting viewpoint people possess. Within the political system of the United States, there are altering viewpoints on gun control. In the text, Garner explain political parties (2016) “In democracies, parties have a more prominent role in providing choice between individual political actors and between policies” (p. 234, ch.10 Political Parties). This can be seen when dealing with gun control when Republicans and Democrats disagree on new policies. The majority of people agree that the best way to ensure that people with mental illnesses do not commit violent crimes with firearms would be through improved screening

19). While both sides make valid arguments, I believe they are playing a game of tug-of-war that is not leading to a solution.