Gun Control in Us: a Challenge to the American Political Culture in Terms of Law and Religion

In the United States of America the right to bear arms gave birth to a phenomenon called the “gun culture,” the term coined in 1970 by a historian Richard Hofstadter, which describes America’s heritage and affection for weapons(1). Not only did gun culture become an inseparable part of American democracy, but also it is considered to be synonymous with independence and freedom, the most important values for American society. Even though the crime rate and murder rate in the U.S. is higher than in any other developed country, U.S. citizens oppose every attempt made to pass gun control legislation(2). However, it may sound like a paradox, but the crime level in the most liberal states, when it comes to gun ownership, is the lowest in the

Those that support the tightening of gun regulations use the increasing number of gun ownerships and gun-related incidents to argue their side. Recent studies show that approximately half of the homes in the United States possess a total of 223 million firearms (Bitto). Because of the high percentages of firearm ownerships, those that encourage tighter gun restrictions agree that the likeliness of such a weapon being used for crime is dramatically increased. 68% of fatal attacks from 2006 were completed with the usage of a gun (“Perhaps the 2nd…”),

A majority of the American people feel that gun control laws will help reduce crime rates because the waiting period would allow time for a person’s temper to cool down. They also feel that gun control will prevent repeat offenders because when a person tries to purchase a handgun, he will have to fill out a lengthy questionnaire. The questionnaire will include questions about the buyer’s past, for example, if they have a criminal record or a record of any mental illness. If there is a criminal record in that person’s history, he will not be able to make the purchase. Restricting handgun ownership would also reduce crime, because guns are used most often in robberies and murders (Mayer 28). They are very easily concealed under a coat, or even in the waistband of pants.

Various studies have come forth arguing the ratio of gun related deaths to amount of conceal and carry permits show that while gun ownership increased in certain states, gun related deaths and violence for that matter decreased slightly . While only slight, a decrease in proportion to the amount of the amount of firearms sold, to deaths is significant in the argument that more guns does not necessarily mean more violence. In come instance, individuals seem safer when others around them are carrying firearms, as this acts as a sort of deterrent system. If someone has the idea or thought to commit an act with a firearm or any act or illegal activity for that matter, there is possibility for an average citizen who had a firearm on their

The severity of the law on criminals will act as a substantial deterrent from committing any crime using a gun. So the penalty of gun crime is focused on the actual problem which is the criminal who use the gun to shoot or to threaten the victims. The severe penalty is one of the solutions which is expressed by Mialon & Wiseman (2005) to decrease gun crimes and increase the freedom of potential victims. Supporters of gun control laws believe that the control of guns is the only way to stop criminals, and punishment is for violators of these laws. As Cooney & Burt (2012) demonstrate that most violent crimes are committed by criminals who had previous arrest records, they also find that most of gun violence in U.S is only between criminals. Such facts demonstrate the issue lies in controlling repeat offenders and not in pushing for more gun control laws. The right of using guns for self-defense combines with applying more severe punishment to gun users could deter criminals and create more security to the

Further, despite the fact that gun ownership in the U.S. increased enormously during the 1990’s, there was a consistent, dramatic reduction of criminal violence. In fact, homicide and violent crime have plunged over the last 15 years. Considering that 18 of 25 countries surveyed had an increase of violent crime, America’s large decline is impressive. Moreover, Norway, Finland, Germany, France, and Denmark also have a high rate of private gun ownership, and the murder rates in these countries are as low as or lower than developed nations with less gun ownership (Kates & Mauser, 2007).

Therefore, gun control has been at the center of our country’s debate for many years. The two strong positions on gun control go as follow: The pro-gun control lawmakers believe that stricter or possibly placing a ban on gun laws would reduce violent crime. We all know that a criminal, who cannot buy guns, will steal, borrow or obtain it via other means. The anti-gun control feels that stricter or banning gun is not a solution to solve crimes; rather it place American citizens in a vulnerable position where they cannot defend themselves. According to a report of crime in America, the analysis of the FBI crime statistics found that states with CWP (concealed weapon permits) have reduced the rate in crimes as follows: murders rate reduces by

We begin with one of the biggest misconceptions on how more gun control actually affects both the United States and other countries. It may seem odd at first but stats and data about other countries and cities in the United States prove that the more gun laws and regulations they have, the more gun homicides there are in the area. The United States has the highest gun ownership percentage than any other country at 1.45 guns per person but our homicide rate is 103rd in the world at only 3.6 per 100,000 residents. Credit Data taken from the years 1994-2014 shows that American gun ownership rates have increased from .94 to 1.45 respectively and that gun homicide rates have greatly decreased during the same time period from 7.0 to 3.6 per 100,000 people. Credit

From the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution has said “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.” The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution was written in December 15, 1791, it was right after the America Revolution during 1761-1774. In the Revolutionary War, all Americans volunteered to pick up their armies defeated the British colonists. So the writers naturally put the gun right to the Constitution. The founding farther Thomas Jefferson clearly stated in the Declaration of Independence, citizens have the right to oppose tyranny. So Americans believe that this is the people's right to possess weapons(guns). It is the foundation of a nation.

When handguns were banned in England in 1977 the crime rate did just so. “From 1997 to 2002 violent crime rates rose 29%, robbery was 24% higher and murders rose 27%. The crime rate in England is double of what it is in the United States” (John Lott). The change was even more drastic in Australia where “ Violent crime rates averaged 32% higher when the law was passed. Armed robbery skyrocketed 74%, aggravated assaults by 32%” (John Lott). The data presented clearly illustrates the need for less gun control laws. Certain states in the United States that have the fastest growth rate for gun ownership experience the biggest drops in crime rates. Fewer gun control laws allow more firearms to be in the hands of law abiding citizens and therefore the power is set in the average person and not of the

Americans are provided by the Constitution, a contract between the government and its people. The Second Amendment states that people have the right to keep and bear arms, and this right shall not be infringed upon by the government. Guns were initially used to protect the founding generation by providing a shield of defiance against the English government soldiers that oppress the people living in the colonies. The first constitutional convention establishes an army, fighting for the rights and protections of the Americans. Resulting in a sudden shift in power from state-level to national-level that latter caused the formation of anti-federalists. The central conflict between the Federalist and Anti-federalists was in

The Second Amendment of the United States’ Constitution states “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”. The amendment was adopted December 15, 1791. The Second Amendment keeps the government from being able to impose dictatorship, while granting people the right to protect themselves. America was founded from rebels, those who opposed King George III and demanded equality. The Declaration states if a dictatorship rises, it is up to the citizens of the United States to demolish the threat to democracy. Through expansion and growth, America’s point of view towards firearms has changed drastically. What once was viewed as a necessity is now viewed as a threat.

The feelings of needing weapons and being protected stems back to certain times in history. Slavery, revolutions, and wars have caused people to think they need other ways to protect themselves from the rest of the world. The Bill of Rights was introduced in the House of Representatives in 1789 by James Madison, which contained amendments to ensure rights for the American people. The Second Amendment, which is part of the United States Bill of Rights states: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This was passed by congress on September 29, 1789, and ratified on December 15, 1791. This amendment was only meant to apply to the federal government, and weapons were to be regulated on a state-by-state basis. Over time, this amendment has been misconstrued, as

In the United States, gun ownership is common. Due to America’s pervasive gun culture which originated during the colonial period, many Americans believe that they have rights to bear arms. In recent decades, however, the rise in the both frequency and number of mass shootings, such as Las Vegas attack and the Orlando nightclub shooting, has transformed the public sentiment toward gun rights gradually and led the debate over gun control to take the center stage in America. While some people still insist on having free access to firearms, more people call for implementing stricter gun control laws. In fact, 52 percent of respondents advocate they support stricter gun laws, yet 48 percent of respondents argue gun control laws infringe on their constitutional right (Davidson). People on both sides hold strong opinions on this topic and are unwilling to compromise to break the deadlock. I believe that the government should implement stricter gun-control measures to reduce future acts of gun-involved violence because on the one hand, the easy access to guns significantly contributes to the increased rates for suicide, homicide, and accidental deaths, resulting in escalation of societal costs associated with the gun violence; on the other hand, the gun violence brings severe psychological effects to survivors of shooting incidents and witnesses to gun-involved incidents.

Gun control essay
The problem of gun control is hotly debated nowadays. Gun results in tens of thousands of deaths and injuries annually. In 2017, there were exactly 277 gun violence cases that caused death of more than four individuals. And just a week ago, a massive shooting happened in Las Vegas, which caused fifty more dead, and two hundred more hurt. This is the largest terrorist attack since 9/11, and the murderer is one sixty-four years old man with guns. Gun control once again at forefront of discussion following this tragedy. Many critics thinks it is necessary to control the number of guns that flow into the market, and they believe this will be an efficient way to stop these tragedies from happening, but there are voices in the society saying that guns don’t kill people, people do. They believe if a person wants to commit a murder, he could use weapons other than guns, so preventing guns will not stop the murder from happening, and people would not have the chance to defense themselves when facing danger. Personally, I think gun control is necessary, and it will defiantly make society a safer place, and reduces the chances of tragedies.