Gun Control Persuasive Essay

Many tragedies have occurred recently that have spurred the debate on whether or not we need tighter gun controls. On one side of the debate are the gun control supporters, who claim that the easy access to guns is the primary cause for high rates of crime plaguing the United States. On the other side are people who argue that gun laws will not prevent criminals from obtaining guns, since they will continue to get them illegally. Guns are used for protection when in the hands of people who obey the law. It is crucial to not hinder law-abiding citizen’s ability to possess firearms with stricter gun laws, since gun laws do not lower crime, and guns can keep people safe.

School should be a place of peace and opportunity, but gaps in the system of gun control threatens the safety of faculty and students. School shootings have killed a total of 297 lives, young and old (Slate Magazine). Gun control has been a continuous nationwide debate for many years. It seems that no one wants to take a stance against guns unless they are personally affected. In order to take control of the matter and prevent more incidents from continuing schools need to change. To achieve a safe environment in schools need to educate faculty, safe and students, heighten security, and assess mental health issues.

Gun ownership is embedded in the fabric of America. The United States has the highest gun ownership rate in the world with 88 guns per 100 people. This is a staggering amount of firearms in the U.S. which our forefathers would 've never imagined when writing the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd Amendment states that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Not everyone interprets this right the same way. Regulating and restricting the use of these firearms brings up opposing sentiments from those in favor of gun control and those who oppose

The Atlantic asked its readers about their first memories with guns, and one reader responded with "We lived in southwestern Colorado my first six years of life (1949-1955). My father had a double-barrel shotgun, and a single-barrel one, a .22 rifle, and a “deer rifle.” We ate more venison than beef and almost as much pheasant as chicken.... I never knew where he kept those guns; I never touched one that he didn’t offer. We only saw them when he cleaned them or packed them to go hunting. He let my older sister and me shoot one of them to feel the kick and power and hear the loudness.... When he passed away in 1981, a year after my mother had passed away, we took inventory of their estate, but we never found those guns. Perhaps he sold them or gave them away or simply kept them hidden somewhere so that no one would be able to find them and shoot someone accidentally" (Green). The issue of gun control has been an increasing cynosure in society, growing in its controversy. The polar opposite sides seem to grow further different from one another, with one side supporting and the other opposing gun control laws/actions. Those who support it tend to believe there should either be no place for the firearms in society at all or that there should be very strict restrictions on who may obtain a given firearm. Those who oppose the laws believe there should either be little to no change in current restrictions or, as the National Rifle Association (NRA) advocates, there ought to be

Every day in America an average of 93 are killed people due to gun violence. One of the biggest concerns today in American policy is gun control. This is a very controversial and complicated topic for both pro-gun and anti-gun supporters. American policy makers need to make it harder for the wrong people to obtain firearms and the fact that Second Amendment and gun control can co-exist. Mental illness constantly emerges in relation to mass shootings and shooters a like, as well as day to day homicides and suicides. America doesn’t necessarily have more crime then other developed countries the crime is just much more lethal. Right-wing Republicans constantly use the Second Amendment as shield to use firearms, the fact is the document is

The violence in the United States is a big issue, but making more gun laws is not the answer. It is an inevitable fact that making it harder to get access to guns would only lead people to turn to black markets and more underhanded deals. In an article for the Los Angeles Times, James Q. Wilson writes, “It is virtually impossible to use new background check or waiting-period laws to prevent dangerous people from getting guns. Those that they cannot buy, they will steal or borrow” (Wilson). Dramatic changes within gun controls laws would, in itself, make more people mad and possibly lead to riots. In many people's minds, more gun control laws would mean to taking guns away. Gun control laws within themself are not a bad thing, the extent to which they are taken within a nation

Every so often the media and news feeds flood with reports of a mass shooting. Families mourn. In the days that follow, calls to action can be heard, and there is a demand for change. Sometimes minor legislation passes, but in the United States extreme change is rarely seen. Other developed nations provide an opposite comparison. Following the Port Arthur shooting in Australia and the shooting in Great Britain, both countries organized for significant gun reform.

According to Nicholas Kristof’s article “our blind spot about guns” gun control is a lot like cars regulation such that if we can regulate cars we can regulate guns. It took a lot of time and effort but thanks to regulations cars are safer than they were many years ago, and the same is very possible with guns. We need to keep our country safe. The first steps to gun control are improving on background checks and also requiring trigger locks on all guns.

From 1988 to 2001, the usage of anti-depressant drugs in the general public increased by four-hundred percent (Swanson). The mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary took place in December of 2012, and during 2014, firearms were used in 88 percent of teen homicides, and 41 percent of teen suicides (“Suicidal Teens”). On February 28th, 2017, the Trump administration repealed a firearms regulation that prevented mentally disabled persons from owning guns. At the same time, teenage mental illness is on the rise, specifically in cases of depression and anxiety. A report from the Surgeon General shows that over 90 percent of adolescents that committed either suicide or homicide have or had a mental disability. Mental disabilities such as depression and anxiety put teenagers at a high risk for homicides and suicides. Teenagers who are stressed due to school, lack of parenting, puberty, bullying, and other factors can develop depression, anxiety or another mental illness. Allowing these teens easy access to firearms proves time and time again to be very dangerous. In some cases, the families of these teens have never been assessed to see if they can responsibly store firearms. The only background check performed is on the owner of the firearm, meaning that a person may own the weapon even if another family member living with them legally cannot. Loose gun control laws allow families with physiologically ill children to have access to firearms, without first checking to see if the disabled children in the home are responsible enough to be around said firearms. Repealing gun control laws instated by the Obama administration will cause an increase in adolescent firearm-related homicides, suicides, and tragedies similar to the one at Sandy Hook Elementary.

Recently, mass shooting is happening everywhere across the country once in a while, notably in Las Vegas and Texas. And even on our campus, a Soka alumni was arrested for threatening a “killing spree” last Friday. The debate about the gun control has been a hot issue throughout the history of the United States, yet during the interview after the mass shooting in Texas, President Trump responded "we could go into the gun control policy], but it's a little bit too soon.", and called the shooter a "very deranged individual" with "a lot of problems over a long period of time" rather than calling him a terrorist. The right to bear arms is one of the unique features in the American society. Only in the United States, Guatemala, and Mexico clearly states the right to bear arms in their constitution. The Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States reads “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

“A series of terror attacks that killed more than 120 people, ISIS claimed responsibility for the horrific Paris attacks,” (Castillo and et. al.). Even though more guns will give more chances of murders, will more gun control laws stop people by getting them, will we be safer without legal guns, and why should we give up our right to bear arms.

Over the past two decades, rising gun control controversy among the American people alters the way Americans foresee firearms. Even today, controversies continue. The Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights states that "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. (Brooks np)." In January of 2016, Obama announced his gun control plan. His plan would more strictly enforce current laws, including firearms (Smith np). People deserve the right to have firearms for the ability to protect, defend, and entertain themselves and others. The way people obtain information about firearms is the biggest controversy among the American people. The thought that "guns kill people," influences people, when in all reality, they need to understand that "people kill people." Although there are around 10,000 people killed in the United States each year from firearms, guns are not the primary conflict in the killings, the people behind the guns are (Brooks np).

Imagine somebody breaking into your home with the intentions of hurting you and your family and trying to take all your valuables that you own in your house, and not having anything to protect your loved ones. Without the protection of a firearm, the intruder could injure or kill all members within the household easily. In the United States, according to the Bill of Rights, a citizen has the right to bear arms, however, recently people have started to believe that guns only incite violence and therefore gun laws need to be more strict. Although, If you own the firearm for the right reasons and go through the process of having a carrying license, then that is within your rights to protect yourself and be able to own the gun. Therefore,

Some people believe that extremely tight gun control laws will eliminate crime, but gun control laws only prevent the 'good guys' from obtaining firearms. Criminals will always have ways of getting weapons, whether it be from the black market, cross borders, or illegal street sales. New gun control laws will not stop them. Since the shootings of Columbine High School, Virginia Tech, and Sandy Hook, the frequency of mass shootings has increased greatly. Gun control is not effective as it has not been shown to actually reduce the number of gun-related crimes. Instead of considering a ban of private firearm possession, and violating individual ownership rights, it may be more practical to consider the option of partially restricting firearm

The gruesome tragedy of fatal gun violence is now an everyday occurrence in the United States. This solemn topic is dreadfully punctuated by two very recent mass shootings, one having the largest death toll in U.S. history. The violent nature of these events creates a morbid sensationalism that bursts from every news outlet; and we begin searching for answers to assuage our rueful disbelief. How and why did this happen? Then, as more details become available, we invariably choose a scapegoat. We look for an outlier; some uncommon detail or logical fallacy that we can blame and in the wake of each shooting, two conversations surface repeatedly. One claims that our country’s mental healthcare system has clearly failed the perpetrator. The other asserts that civilians should not have access to semi-automatic rifles. Outwardly, these points seem like legitimate arguments, but there are many misconceptions surrounding both of them. Is there a solution within either of these arguments? To answer this question, we have to examine our current gun laws and determine if these scenarios would be both feasible and effective.