Concealed Weapons Carry Lower Crime rates

One of the biggest arguments against gun control is that it does not prevent criminals from committing violent crimes, such as murder. Based on information gathered by Argesti and Smith, this A Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) study showed that when a handgun ban was put in effect in Washington D.C. “the murder rate averaged 73% higher than it was at the outset of the law” (Argesti and Smith). Another report from the FBI showed that when Florida and Texas implemented a right-to-carry law, their murder rates dropped by 30 and 36 percent (qtd. in Argesti and Smith). It is blatantly obvious that areas with high crime will continue to have the same level of crime, even after the implementation of stricter gun control laws.

Trevor Burrus from Cato Institute's Center for Constitutional Studies showed how the use of guns for good are far greater than uses for the bad. “In the past 20 years, the cases of permit holders using their guns improperly are quite rare.”(Burrus 3). This is a problem for gun control because the valid arguable point for it is becoming increasingly smaller. This is also a problem for the media because they report vague negative gun usage rather than positive because a large majority of the media's reporters are liberal gun control advocates. Americans who concealed carry firearms are better off in a defense position rather than an unarmed civilian. “studies have found that Americans use guns defensively between 830,000 and 2.45 million times per year.” (Burrus 2). This is a problem because a very small percentage of gun related incidents make it to the news, therefore people think that there aren't as many firearm crimes than there is, and could potentially be unarmed in an emergency situation. Also this means that since there are this many people using guns defensively, there are people who die innocently because they are unarmed. From this, the government had make the laws that prevent people from being able to defend themselves in desperate defense

The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun. If gun laws become opposed to the law, then only criminals will have guns. Stricter gun laws will not stop a madman from killing. In fact, 34% of mass shooters were prohibited from owning weapons; although, a surveyed showed 57% of gun owners believe guns are too easy to buy and 35% of people who carry guns would make Americans feel safer. Gun control will only affect the law-biding citizens simultaneously as the demand of illegal weapons on the black-market increases. Background checks will only restrict criminals from legally buying a firearm, but that does not stop a mentally ill person; which are usually the ones to start a shooting massacre. The second amendment literally states “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Protected by the second amendment, it will be hard to regulate guns because now every single individual has a right to bear arms. For example, the Texas Baptist church shooter was gun downed by an armed citizen. Had there been stricter gun laws in Texas towards not being able to have a concealed firearm in public, the shooter could have gotten away. People should have the right to exercise the second amendment; therefore, gun control will not work because criminals will always find a way to obtain guns, supply and demand on the black market will increase and there are more existing weapons than people in the U.S.

Gun Control Laws have been proven ineffective. Cities like Chicago and Detroit have very strict gun control laws, yet they have some of the highest crime rates, whereas cities with more guns have lower crime rates. Places that have a higher rate of gun ownership, have less murders. Gun control laws do not prevent criminals from breaking the law. Criminals will still obtain firearms, or

In today’s society the majority of the crimes are still being committed by people who have possessed a firearm that has been obtained illegally or without proper permits. That being said there has been a strong push for gun control because of the rise of shootings involving a large group of people such as the Columbine massacre, Virginia Tech shooting and latest Aurora movie theater shooting involving people who have purchased firearms legally. Gun control laws in the United States have been established for many years but to maintain a civilized society with limited crime stronger control laws need to be enforced in which will help reduce crime in our country. Establishing stronger gun control laws will educate

Guns are a major problem in our society and the numbers of these gun-related murders are continuing to rise. On top of the murders you also have people losing their lives through misfire and gun-related suicides. The total death toll of all gun-related deaths averages over 30,000 per year in the U.S. (http://blogs.kqed.org/lowdown/2013/03/07/u-s-gun-deaths-visualizing-the-numbers/). I believe that enforcing stricter gun laws will contribute to getting these numbers lower. The numbers do not lie, we as a society have a problem with gun-violence and we need to do something to fix it.

In a speech regarding the Charleston, South Carolina shooting in June of 2015, President Obama stated, “More than 11,000 people were killed by gun violence in 2013 alone.” After the Sandy Hook shooting, in Newtown, Connecticut with a death toll of 26, Congress has still failed to pass these regulations which 90% of Americans wish to have. While tightening the gun control may not guarantee the complete absence of mass shootings or gun violence and crime, it has definately been shown to significantly reduce these rates. America is in need of tighter gun control laws because current regulations do not deter violence and crime, and the interpretation of the constitutional right has since been misconstrued.

Some gun advocates often suggest the more law abiding citizens that have guns the less crime there will be. Gun control advocates will argue the opposite, and that no guns are better. People will always have their opinions on guns and gun control but most gun owners people are very responsible. This includes the safety of taking care of guns and putting them safely away. Keeping firearms locked up, trigger-locked, stored separately from their ammunition, or some combination of the three, the gun advocates, as well as non-gun owners, believe less accidents would occur. It is possible that this could make guns if gun owners took these actions. Statistics show that every year thousands of guns are stolen each year and end up in criminal’s hands because of improper handling and storage of guns. People sometimes abuse their rights to the second and fourteenth amendment. Sometimes guns do end up in the hands of irresponsible people. Thousands of people are killed, injured because of careless people leaving guns

More gun laws would have a negative effect on shootings and crime rates. Stricter gun laws would not prevent people from getting guns, would not prevent killings, and would not fare well with the people of the United States. Strict gun laws would only prevent law-abiding citizens from getting guns, and criminals would still be able to get them. Crime and shooting rates do not go down after increase in gun-restrictive laws are passed. People in the United States have the right to defend themselves from harm, and the 2nd Amendment right to own firearms.

One of the main topics of debate is whether or not gun laws actually correspond with lower murder rates. “The average annual gun death rate ranged from almost 3 per 100,000 in Hawaii to 18 per 100,000 in Louisiana. Hawaii had 16 gun laws, and along with New Jersey, New York and Massachusetts was among states with the most laws and fewest deaths. States with the fewest laws and most deaths included Alaska, Kentucky, Louisiana and Oklahoma.” (CBSnews.com). These statistics can lead one to believe that more gun laws equate to lower death rates. What these numbers prove is that some gun regulations help lower death rates. However, what gun control activists would have you believe that a full on gun ban would lower these numbers more. This is not the case as evident in the following, “During the years in which the D.C. handgun ban and trigger lock law was in effect, the Washington, D.C. murder rate averaged 73% higher than it was at the outset of the law, while the U.S. murder rate averaged 11% lower” (James D.

The majority of anti-gun advocates voice their opinion that more guns would produce more crimes unfortunately for them there is little to no truth in that claim. In reality, when gun ownership increased the amount of murders diminished as well. When states passed concealed weapons laws there was significant drops in the number of multiple victim shootings occurring, the number of deaths, and the number of injuries at these shootings. In 1997 both Wales and England banned handguns and the instantaneous effect was a 50% increase according to crime research. They never saw a day lower than after the year they decided to ban handguns. It has been proven by many surveys that the banning of guns increases crime rate which in turn proves that gun control is not the answer.

Gun violence in the United States is higher than ever, and criminals with guns will “…kill as many as 1000 people each day” (Alpers&Wilson). Taking this into perspective, it is only right to fight fire with fire or, in this case, use a gun to protect yourself and those around you. Gun control does not only decrease the ability for protection, it also decreases our rights as U.S citizens. The constitution clearly states that we are given the right to bear arms, meaning we may carry fire arms. Even if we have stricter laws for guns, it will not stop killers from shooting innocent people. These men and women causing damage to the lives of numerous individuals do not care if there is a law banning guns, because all they truly want to do is

There is a growing crowd that believes having a law that allows individuals to carry a concealed handgun will reduce crime because the criminal is less likely to attack someone if he has to think twice whether that person is carrying a concealed handgun or not. The thought is that concealed carry laws makes you safer in your everyday life because there is less of a chance of being victimized. Although the statistics don’t bear this fact, the loudest voice sometimes gets the most attention and press coverage. New Hampshire’s state motto is “Live Free or Die.” Although the phrase came from a toast written by General John Stark, New Hampshire’s most famous soldier of the American Revolutionary War, the motto appears on the states license plates and is commonly known among the locals to mean that everyone in the state carry’s a concealed handgun, and they would rather die than to give them up. The locals believe this is why their crime rate is so low. However, being such a small state, with less urban areas and good economy, concealed carry becomes more debatable. My goal in this paper is to show that concealed carry laws don’t reduce crime or make America safer. I will also talk about laws that have been enacted all over the United States to allow gun enthusiast to carry, but the evidence doesn’t support a decrease in crime rates. To achieve this goal, I have researched several sources online, which I have documented and have cited the sources at the end of my paper.

Gun control should be enforced because it will help reduce crime rate. Alex Yablon states “The Stanford team found precisely the opposite: ‘Ten years after the adoption of RTC laws,’ they write, ‘violent crime is estimated to be 13-15 percent higher than it would have been without the RTC law”(Yablon). This proves that gun laws are way too lenient and need to be enforced more because the RTC law made it easier for people to get their hands on firearms which was supposed to decrease the crime rate but as stated in the evidence it instead had the opposite effect. So gun laws would have a beneficial impact, reducing the crime rate. Douglas Weil discusses “We know that well-tailored gun laws work. The Brady Law is working to prevent easy access to handguns by criminals. Since the law was first implemented, eighty-five felons a day have been denied access to a handgun that they tried to purchase from licensed gun dealers. Virginia 's law limiting handgun purchases to one gun a month has had an enormous impact on gun trafficking patterns along the east coast”(Weil). This shows that the Brady Law is help enforcing gun control by preventing easy access to guns which is reducing crimes such as felonies. It also proves how gun laws were not strict enough because after the Brady law was put into action, a great amount of people trying purchase handguns were not legible to do so and before this law,

If you have ever been in a life threatening situation with no way to defend yourself, being denied access to a firearm makes the situation worse.  Many law abiding citizens that feel threatened are not able to obtain a firearm for protection.  Innocent people are dying while criminals are getting away with gun related crimes.  There can be many regulations and laws against guns, but if a person wants a gun they will find a way to get one.  The thought of criminals having guns in their possession is a scary thought, but would you want to be the one who is unarmed?  Research shows there is no direct correlation between gun control and lower crime rates; therefore, denying law abiding citizens access to weapons for protection is unfair