Chicago Handgun Bans

Mass shootings are increasing in the United States, and gun control advocates are seizing the opportunity to push anti-gun legislation to deter gun violence in America. Guns and the Second Amendment have come to the forefront of political rhetoric, leading to conflicting views between lawmakers on the future of gun legislation. Republican lawmakers are encouraging law abiding citizens to acquire firearms and to defend themselves against acts of violence by criminals. On the contrary, Democratic lawmakers believe the only way to slow gun violence in the United States is to remove guns from society. While certain politicians believe strict gun laws would protect the American people, the proposed policies would make our nation more vulnerable

Laws regulating the use of guns in America have been a hot topic for years. Media coverage of mass shootings, acts of terrorism in and outside of the United States, and stories of families being murdered in the night has resulted in a desensitized, or perhaps, overly sensitized nation. People are scared and have centered their idea of safety on one of two main approaches: creating stricter gun laws so less crime occurs, or taking away gun restrictions so everyone can protect themselves against crime. Policies stemming from these vantage points begin by the agenda set by pertinent support and opposition groups, reflecting these approaches.

As it is well known gun violence is a major problem in today’s society, places like Chicago and New York City have a serious epidemic on their hands. It is not uncommon to hear about an incident where a gun was involved in these big cities on a day to day basis, but it’s not just the big cities, these type of things are happening nationwide. There has been an argument for many decades whether the cause of such violence is due to the lack of gun control laws or the restrictions put on firearms. Both sides of the isle will argue, the more liberal individual will tell you there is not enough while the conservative individual will tell you the laws put in place are too strict.

Gun control is one of the most controversial issues talked about in today’s society. Some people believe that if we take guns away from civilians then there will be less violence in the county. Others think that it is our right to bear arms. President Obama is trying to pass laws to enforce stricter gun laws, because he believes that one of the biggest problems in American is that too many people are able to have guns.

The gun control issue has recently created a massive uproar throughout the U.S. due to some major horrific events such as the Virginia Tech shooting in 2007, where 32 people were killed, the Sandy Hook shooting in 2012 where 27 people were killed, mostly children, and the Columbine shooting in 1999 where 13 people were killed, (CNN) as well as many others. To some, it is a crime issue, to others it’s a right’s issue. It is, obviously, a safety issue, an education issue, a racial issue, and a political issue, among others, and within each of these issues there are those who want more gun control, the Democrats, and those who

The debate for gun reform is at a boiling point, because of the mass shootings that have been mercilessly tearing bullet-sized holes through the fabric of the American people, for the past 10, plus years. As a people, we can no longer sit idly by, without demanding change in the form of gun legislation, that would protect, we the people, while learning in classrooms, worshiping freely at church, or while attending country music festivals. Although

Next, part of the reason gun control was so prominent in the 2016 presidential election and campaign. It seems that (former) President Barack Obama (in office 2008-2016) has suddenly shown his true colors as a gun control-supporting Democrat. Back in 2008, when he was campaigning for his first term in office as president, he blew off gun control, saying that his opinions on gun control were not “an excuse not to vote for me [Obama],” and he did not put much emphasis on them; the only notable thing that was said on the matter was a call for “common sense reforms” (1). These reforms are believed to mainly push background checks, as it is considered “common sense” to ensure that one’s criminal record and mental health are in order before he/she

From 1975 until the DC vs Heller ruling in 2008, the Firearms Control Regulations Act was in place, which banned residents of DC from owning handguns, automatic firearms, or high-capacity semiautomatic weapons. Since then, very little gun legislation has been passed at all. In fact, since the horrific Newtown shooting that occurred in 2012, not a single piece of legislation has been passed on guns. While conservatives might feel sorry for the victims, they realize that many conservatives, like Joe the Plumber (the Ohio workingman who gained prominence in the 2008 election), who once said, “Your dead kids...don’t trump my constitutional rights”, would stop voting for them if they tried to implement gun control policies. Many on the right claim that gun control is an effort not just to regulate guns, but to completely ban them. This is an effective scare-tactic used to get their constituents angry at the Democrats. But gun regulation and gun bans are two very different things. Data shows us that there are certain groups of people who should never be allowed to own a gun. This includes those who have prior offenses of violence, those who are mentally ill, suspected terrorists, and people who have children living in their home. However, there are people who can make a reasonable claim to needing a gun, and they shouldn’t be denied that right. For example, people in very rural areas, without much access to the protection provided by public safety officials should have the right to own a gun if they demonstrate they are able to use one properly. Also, hunters and people who have obtained restraining orders against those who have threatened them with violence might make a case for their right to own a gun. Most gun control advocates don’t want to take away guns from everyone, they

The concept of total gun-control is viewed by many as the ban of all firearms for civilian possession, as well as severe restrictions on the certain types of firearms allowed for civilian possession. In very recent years we can examine the effects of instituting sever gun restriction in cities and the negative effects that it had. Washington DC and Chicago provide

Aurora, Newtown, Chattanooga, and Lafayette have recently been the settings of dreadful tragedies. Each of these catastrophes results in select politicians, and even President Barrack Obama, demanding Gun control across the United States of America. Some anti-gun activists desire stricter gun laws, while other anti-gun activists have acquired aspirations for a ban on all guns across the nation. They claim that the Second Amendment is outdated, and that we will be safer in the complete absence of firearms. This has been, and continues to be, a popular topic of discussion especially with the Presidential Race coming upon us. This highly debated subject can be summarized into one question; does gun control work?

During president Obamas time in office, one of the big things he has talked about is the control on guns, and weather we should have the right to keep them, or have them taken away. President Obama has made a couple different stands on this. I want to know if his policies have made America more happy and stable about it, or if it has caused more anger and frustration with people. It is a human right to own a gun, so when there is talk of taking them away, the tensions rise. The reason gun policy is a big topic in America, is because it is more important to different types of people and some people are more greatly affected by it.

Gun control opponents argue that the Second Amendment is not only meant to provide citizens a means of protection from burglars or other forms of harm. They believe it also ensures that people cannot be taken over by a domestic or foreign military (Flamehorse 1). Having too many gun control laws could create an unbalanced level of power between the government and the members of society. Less restrictions and laws keeps the balance in check and prevents governments from having military power over the people . In addition, most citizens believe gun laws will make our nation safer by reducing the number of guns in the population as well as the types of guns allowed for ownership. However, laws are not followed by those that commit crimes. For example, the city of Chicago prohibited the sale of guns in the city limits effective in 2010. In 2010 there were 432 murders, and in 2012 there were 500. Chicago was recently named by the FBI as the nation’s murder capital (Flamehorse 1). This would indicate more laws do not necessarily result in a decrease in crime. The gun control topic is also a factor in the political world. The two major parties in the United States do not agree on gun control rights or laws. Therefore, large sums of money are spent on advertising and lobbyists in order to make their agenda known to voters. In 2011, $4,212,996 was spent by gun rights groups and $240,000 was spent by gun control groups (Sanburn 2).

In 2015, The US Supreme Court rejected a challenge by gun rights activists to an ordinance enacted by a Chicago suburb that bans assault weapons and large-capacity magazines. The refusal by the nine justices to hear the case, coming at a time of fierce debate over the nation's gun laws following a series of mass shootings, means that the 2013 ordinance passed by the city of Highland Park, Illinois remains in effect. The Highland Park regulation bans various semi-automatic weapons, including well-known guns such as the AR-15 and AK-47, in addition to any magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of bullets. In April, the Chicago-based Seventh US Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the challenge, saying the ordinance does not violate the right to bear arms guaranteed by the US Constitution's Second Amendment. The Supreme Court has not taken up a major gun case since 2010. (Reuters News Agency, 2015)

For many years, people have been pushing the American government to implement new laws that deal with gun control. Supporters of the argument claim that increased gun control will drastically reduce the crime rate in America. Nevertheless, a majority of gun control arguments are formed from strict control of data and emotional appeal. The mainstream media picks up these stories and broadcasts them to viewers without providing any context to them. While gun control activists assert that gun control is necessary, the American government should not ban guns because of the following reasons: potential vulnerability of innocent people being shot at by criminals and the inability for people to defend themselves against their own government.

The legality of having guns and possessing firearms in the United States of America is well engraved within the Second Amendment of the nation’s constitution. However, the issue of gun regulation has remained a central topic in America’s public. Some people advocate for a total ban on gun possession, while others are totally against this idea. The shooting incident in Las Vegas weeks ago has raised controversial debates in the United States of America. In fact, the White House is concerned on the stand that President Trump will take on the issue of stricter gun laws. One of the cities that has gained the attention of both the legislators on this topic is Chicago. For its reputation for its low rate of gang arrests, lax punishments for gun law violations, and comparatively weak laws in accordance with surrounding states, it is justifiable to say that Chicago’s daily shootings are a clear indicator that strict state gun laws don’t work.