Explain Why Guns Should Not Be Banned

Hello, this writing is to explain why gun control should not be in effect. Have you heard recently about the government trying to place gun control on the us citizens. Gun control should not be placed in the us. It is against the constitution in our 2nd amendment which states that we have the right to bear arms.

The general argument made by author Shiha Dalmia in her work, “The Case Against Banning Guns” is that instead of trying to ban all the guns in the world, we should try using different methods to reduce the amount of harm weapons sometime cause. There are roughly 300 million guns in this country, which means there is nearly one for every man, woman, and child. With about 300 million guns in circulation, it would be nearly impossible to ban all of the weapons in this country. The topic of banning guns is a very controversial topic because not everyone who owns a gun is going to use it to harm other people, he or she might be using that weapon for hunting, gun shows, maybe even to symbolize something that is meaningful to him, or if worst comes to worst, use it to protect himself and his family incase an intruder were to enter his home.

Gun control should not exist at all in the United States. Mass shootings have almost become seen as normal event in the United States. What people do not understand is that gun control is not the answer; there are countries with little to no control that have fewer shootings. According to The Washington Post,Finland is ranked number 4 in countries with the most guns despite that they only had 24 homicides by firearm (“Gun homicides and ownership by countries” n.pag.) . In the article Did Gun Control Work In Australia “it is shown that gun control has reduced the problems but it still has not completely got rid of all firearm deaths”(Matthews n.pag.). The number of murders, homicides, or suicides do not go up due to people just owning more guns. Clayton Perry, a staff writer at the University of Maine, even points out “Stricter gun laws were in place during the Assault Weapons Ban between 1994 and 2004, but that didn't stop the shooters at Columbine in 1999 ”(Perry n. pag.). In Iceland, thirty out of a hundred people own a gun and they have zero homicides caused by guns a year(“Gun Homicides and ownership by country” n. pag.). In this day and age, everything is unpredictable, guns are a form of protection for everyone and there should not be restrictions on protection. The U.S. Department of Justice released a data brief that states, “ On average in 1987-92 about 83,000 crime victims per year used a firearm to defend themselves or their property”(Rand BJS Statistician n. pag.). The National Sheriffs Association released that the average police response time is at eighteen minutes while the average school shooting only last twelve minutes (“Embracing Technology To Decrease Response Time” n. pag.). Gun control should not exist because other countries do fine without it , high gun ownership has no link with increasing death rates , and guns are not harmful when instructions are followed.

Consider this hypothetical situation, a man walks into a bank with a firearm then shouts “Everyone get down, NOW!” But since we can carry guns to protect ourself from harm. So a few people pull out their guns and say “why don’t you get on the ground?” Some government officials want to take our guns away but many people won’t allow that to happen. If guns got taken away, then it would only make criminals want to get guns more, then it is easier for them to kill people because we are unarmed. There are many hit and runs. Does that mean that cars should be banned? Either way, whether guns are taken away or not, people will still get injured or killed by guns.

Did you know you are 4 times more likely to be killed with a knife or other cutting instrument than you are by a rifle or a shotgun? Gun rights and gun control are always hot items during any political discussion, whether it is between peers or politicians. One of the many great advantages to being an American is the ability to choose for one's own self what to believe in. Another advantage, in my opinion, is the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Laws should not restrict gun rights because first, it would infringe the second amendment, second, guns are a part of our culture, and finally, if guns were outlawed, citizens of the U.S. would become vulnerable.

Ten more people fall victim to another public shooter, and another gun control debate comes spiraling from the after math as laws against guns try to be placed. Is this really the best way to deal with the issue? No. The issue is people are killing people not guns are killing people. Society wants to ban guns because people are afraid when in actuality guns themselves are not the things that need to be banned. Even then do you have any proof the gun laws actually lower crime? Gun laws also go directly against the 2nd Amendment and it takes away one of the best means of self-defense from invaders and criminals. Therefore gun laws should not be put in place. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. We have a right to bear arms and is not something that can just be taken away.

Gun control has been a long debate to determine if it’s better to have stricter access to firearms. America is one of the few countries that has gun rights embedded in their constitution. But what makes the US exceptional is that it has the right to keep and bear arms, other countries do not provide the right to have access to them, but rather, the government is allowed to regulate its use. The right to bear arms has also been the cause of growing violence and crime, at least according to anti-gun lobbyists. Citizens should be aware the dangers and harm that guns present to society. Controlling the sale of firearms can greatly decrease the number of violent crimes.

The world is a dangerous place to live. Every day, we wake up, send our children off to school and spend most of our lives working. We put ourselves in harm’s way every time we leave our homes. At any moment, we could be killed in an automobile accident, plane crash, gunshot wound or any other random occurrence that happens in this crazy world we live in. There have been so many advancements in technology and medicine to protect ourselves from these lucks of the draw events that life throws at us, but some people seem to have a problem with gun ownership. Gun ownership for many is viewed like the seatbelt of a car or the vaccine given to us to prevent the Flu, it is a form of protection and security. Some people in our country would argue that there needs to be a banning of fire arms or more restrictions to keep fire arms out of people’s hands. I disagree with this idea. I feel that Federal and State governments should not bad firearms or make the purchasing process more difficult. It is every legal citizen right to bear arms, whether it is for protection or sport.

Nearly 53% of identified shootings took place at elementary schools, and 47% took place on college or university campuses (Everytown). Over the past few years public shootings have gone up. With this long-standing debate people are reacting and saying guns cause these shootings. Guns do not kill people, people kill people. Not all people are bad in the world, that is why the government should not ban guns. Guns can keep people safe and make people feel safer.

5. The vast majority of gun owners are not all crackpots. It’s just those few who are mentally ill and take a gun and kill innocent people. Most people keep a gun

The opinions on gun control have been a very controversial and constant debate between many people. In James Q. Wilson’s New York Times article, “Just Take Away Their Guns,” Wilson adequately explains how the removal of illegal guns on the streets should be the main point in determining the boundaries regarding American gun control regulations which are frequently debated in our modern world. He states that guns should be taken away from the criminals and not the law abiding citizens. I recognize the fact that if someone wants to kill someone they will do it no matter what weapons are obtainable, but we should make it not so easy for them.

     Gun control is a very controversial issue among society at present. Many feel guns are the cause of a great amount of crime. This has been an especially popular topic recently in lieu of the shooting at Columbine and other high schools across the country. Are these crimes reason to take away our freedom to bear arms? I do not believe so. The average person uses guns mainly as a means of protection. If limitations are placed on guns, they will only stop the average American from obtaining a gun. The real criminals out there will still be able to obtain guns through the black market. Every American should have the right to protect them self.

Guns have been used throughout history for war, hunting, and protection. Since then, the killing capacity and speed of guns has improved dramatically. Guns have been a part of American culture from its roots. However, as times have changed and guns are no longer a necessity, gun control has become increasingly urgent to prevent unnecessary crime and killings. Guns should be banned for everyone but the law enforcement and military. Guns should be banned to prevent mass shootings and lower crime rates, while being supported by history and the constitution.

Gun ownership should be banned to reduce the 100,000 deaths of americans that are shot every year in the United States. Throughout America’s history, we have been known as the extremely gun violent country unfit to protect our citizens from danger. The television news reports continue to display the violent crimes and school shootings that has harmed innocent people especially children. When the government allows guns to be legal in the United States, they are giving people the responsibility to use this weapon for self defense purposes and recreational sport such as hunting. However, gun owners have been unable to handle this responsibility

“I argue that location-specific gun bans (commonly known as “gun-free zones”) are typically unjust” (Pg.1, Hsiao)