Gun Control Cons

The American society has for long struggle with the debate and issue of private gun ownership. There are the advocates proposing lenient laws to allow more gun possession while the people against it calling for stringent laws to control the situation. For many centuries, since the enactment of the Second Amendment and even during the slavery period, gun ownership remains an issue to debate. The negative effects have been the harassment of the minority and the vulnerable as well as increased crimes. On other hand, it has helped promote the security of the people and ensure there is no violation of people’s rights to own guns as required by the Second Amendment. As such, gun control and ownership remains a controversial and hot topic of discussion

If gun control is regulated, then we will have less crime. Access to firearms makes killing easy, efficient, and impersonal, which increases the lethality of crime. Josh Sugarmann, the Executive Director of the Violence Policy Center has once said, "We recoil in horror and search for explanations, but we never face up to the obvious preventive measure: a ban on the handy killing machines that make crimes so easy.”Allowing untrained people to carry guns puts others at risk and it can result in self-inflicting injuries both by suicide and unintentional incidents. Gun violence in America kills more than 30,000 and injures almost 70,000 each year. Guns can be misused and abused, which is why gun

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

Criminals are provoked by self-protection and guns can thus be a disincentive. A majority of convicted American criminals have reported that they fear from attacking the victims who are armed. Their fear of encountering armed victims surpasses their fear of being caught by police (Lott, pp.05). Robbers do not attempt to break into houses after midnight because of the probability of being shot. Thus, society should be against gun control because crimes will decrease.

The recent terrorist situations in America could have turned out differently if the victims had been armed. There have been too many terrorist situations lately in America. Many people who are not in favor of gun rights want to make it more difficult or even impossible for citizens to purchase weapons. When stricter gun control is enforced, then citizens may not be able to protect themselves. We need to find a way to prevent gun related tragedies, but that does not involve taking guns away from citizens (Hockley). We need more guns in the hands of citizens, then they will be able to protect themselves during violent crimes (Goldberg). The call for increased gun rights in America is vital for the safety

cited for demanding unlimited access to firearms, but according to the data provided in this paper, there is only a small chance that privately owned guns will be used in a situation against a robber, intruder, or a criminal. Firearms that are legally purchased by civilians will most likely be used by criminals and will leave innocent citizens injured. Also, supporters of gun rights believe that ‘the right to keep and bear arms” is a guaranteed right to all citizens of the United States and cann

The debate on gun control revolves around how the laws to be implemented will affect the acquisition of guns by the criminals as well as law-abiding citizens. Gun control proponents are of the opinion that in the absence of gun control laws, criminals will acquire guns too easily. In the same vein, if all citizens are armed, criminals will have a greater incentive to acquire guns. Hence, there will be too many guns in circulation and crime cases will increase. Contrastingly, gun

American citizens have been given a right to firearms, and this right should not be infringed. Opponents of this right to firearms argue that, citizens should not be allowed the right to firearms. Their main reason is that, it will help curb violence cases by guns. This has been challenged because; criminals will still acquire firearms illegally and continue terrorizing citizens because, they are fully aware that, they are not armed. Moreover, according to Winkler (89), “Guns do not kill people; it is people who kill people,” and so, denying citizens the right to own guns will not stop any violence. Likewise, the society will not be safe as there will be an increase in violence and criminal activities because the citizens have no firearms to defend themselves.

For this reason, it is incredibly hard for the country to agree or disagree on controversial topics such as gun control. Gun control laws and restrictions are methods in reducing the accessibility of firearms to the ordinary citizen. The belief is that with less dangerous firearms in the streets, the less crime there will be. Numerous studies and evidence show that a reduction of gun ownership can ironically increase the crime rate. This trend might seem counter intuitive but when seen at a different perspective, it becomes logical. When law abiding citizens are not able to purchase a weapon but a criminal is through illegal means such as the black market, it leaves people helpless against the gunman. Many advocates for gun control seem to ignore the facts and trends that show that gun ownership and crime rate does not have any correlation. Instead, these advocates seem to rely on the emotional appeal of people, exploiting the tragedies that are caused by shootings, wars, and criminal activities. The purpose of this essay is to educate people on the negative side effects of gun control and on how guns can actually decrease

The first premise is that private gun ownership causes more harm than it prevents. More problems arise with the possession of guns, as a person who usually get into fistfights now partake in shooting people when provoked. It doesn't always has to be on purpose, as one can also shoot

In the article Sager argues that "Higher levels of gun ownership do not produce a safer society and often lead to a higher number of deaths due to gun violence" (Sager, 2012). While this argument seems valid, it's based on assumption not fact. It's assumed that higher levels of gun ownership would lead to higher crime but that's not the case. A gun can actually prevent a criminal from proceeding with a crime. The criminal starts to hesitate to pursue any crime when he sees that the victims involved have firearms to protect themselves. Many robbers and criminals confess that their biggest fear when committing any crime is that the person owns a gun (Connuck, 2013). If these criminals are actually telling the truth about this then we can assume that the fear instilled in them will cut crime rates. Therefore, allowing citizens to own a firearm leads to less criminal activity. Additionally, armed citizens will be safer in society. By keeping gun laws as they are, crime is actually reduced in society (Annear, 2013). Conversely, if a policy to control guns was, in effect, criminals would still find ways to get guns illegally and victims would be easier targets. Citizens having ownership, protect themselves against gun violence and therefore lower crime

Equally, gun control also limits strategies for people to promote self-defense. Arguably, guns and/or firearms can be a good instrument in creating protection. Here, people find ways to escape trouble because they have the necessary means to create apprehension from people. Related to this, the citizenry would also have a means to respond to threats by criminals. However, by creating gun control, the restrictions bring forward limitations for safety and protection. In essence, the advancement of gun control allows people to feel powerless in facing threats or create insecurity in the environment because they don’t have the necessary means to assure or protect their life.

The implication of gun control laws, meant to protect the nation, has been the spotlight of controversy for hundreds of years. Advocates claim their effectiveness is maximal, and they genuinely benefit the populace. Evidence contradicts these contentions, showing that gun control laws have been proven to be disadvantageous in their intentions. The absence of gun control is safer for the general public and ensures the rights of the citizens.

In the past year, I am sure that you have heard about the issue of gun control. Well, do you really know the full story behind the debate? My goal for this essay is to fully explain everything to you behind this issue and why it is such a big deal in our world today. There are many different problems behind why gun control is such a big issue in the world today, and why some people want gun control and others do not. Through these contrasting opinions on gun control, the world will never fully decide what is completely right.

The banning of guns at the hands of the American government would leave law-abiding citizens defenseless against armed thieves. In America, many criminals use guns to commit an inconsiderable amount of crimes, such as murder and robbery. To prepare for a worst-case scenario, people who have a gun license arm themselves with multiple firearms to protect their families. By arming themselves, gun owners feel some sense of security, should they be involved in a gun-related incident. In the article “The NRA Is Right, But We Still Need to Ban Handguns,” the author states that “One tenet of the National Rifle Association’s faith has always been that handgun controls do little to stop criminals from obtaining handguns” (Sugarmann). If the