Gun Free Zone Shootings

With the popular culture providing positive images of guns, the United States has a gun prevalence that is very rare in the modern world. While many people appreciate the “gun culture”, guns are heavily involved in violence in the United States. According to U.S. Department of Justice, since 1960, more than 750,000 Americans have died under firearms, including homicides, suicides, and unintentional injuries. The figure 1 provides a comprehensive survey of U.S. violent crimes for the period from 1993 to 2011.This figure illustrates that from 1993 to 2011, about 60% to 70% of homicides were associated with a firearm. Over the same period, between 6% and 9% of all nonfatal violence, with about 20% to 30% of robberies and 22% to 32% of aggravated assaults involving a firearm.

In the past six months, there have been a total of 19,635 gun incidents. Out of those 19,635 incidents, 107 were mass shootings, 829 were home invasions, and 604 were for defensive use, according to Gunviolencearchive.org. It is unbelievable to see the number of gun related incidents that have happened in just the past six months. What is even more unbelievable to imagine is that so many of those incidents could have been avoided if people were allowed to carry concealed guns in certain places. Concealed carry, or concealed weapons, is the practice of carrying weapons, such as a handgun, in public in a concealed manner. All fifty states in the United States allow concealed carry in public places to some degree. But, some places, for example, schools, restaurants, and stores, prohibit concealed weapons. The controversy about whether concealed weapons should be prohibited in certain locations has been debated for years, and more often in the past decade. On one side of the debate, supporters of the “gun-free zones” claim that prohibiting concealed weapons in certain locations will reduce crime and ensure that the location is free of gun violence, allowing concealed weapons can result to more guns landing in the hands of criminals, and some even insist that public safety should be left to professional, qualified police officers, not ignorant citizens with little to no expert training. However, it is absolutely necessary to know that prohibiting weapons in certain locations

In the summer months of the year 2000, a horrible tragedy occurred in California that left two children dead before the police killed the intruder. A fourteen-year-old girl, whose father had trained her in the use of firearms, could not access her father’s gun when she needed to because it was locked in accordance with California’s state law (Pratt). This preventable tragedy is one of many reported scenarios that scream that there is no need for gun safety locks.

Research shows that ninety-eight percent of mass shooting occur on gun-free zones (Morse [1]). Also, mass shooting have increased since gun-free school zones were implemented in 1995 (Nedzel 2). This legislation only makes matters worse. "Gun-free zones offer a safe haven for mass murderers" (O'Brien and Stanton [1]). Criminals know that honest citizens are not carrying concealed weapons in gun-free zones, so they know that if they attack one of these zones, no one will stop them quickly. For this reason, cities that have enacted gun-free zones have higher crime rates. An example of this would be the city of Chicago. Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation, but they have one of the highest homicide rates. They have disarmed the honest people and “empowered criminals” (Owens [1]). These gun-free zones only cause more

Critics of placing a “Gun-Free Zone” sign in a gun-free zone argue that doing so endangers the lives of the innocent individuals within the premises. One case cited by the critics is the Cinemark Century 16 Theater in Aurora, Colorado shooting on July 20, 2012 where 12 were dead and 58 injured. According to the critics, Cinemark, like all other gun-free zones with such a sign, have become a magnet for those who want to kill numerous unarmed people (Lott, 2012). Instead of securing the people, an explicit “Gun-Free Zone” signage is like a come-on sign that invites criminals to commit crime knowing that they can do so freely without serious resistance as the law-abiding individuals are unarmed and thus unable to assault them

It is 10 years from now and you friend are living in a nice house with a family. They are home cleaning while their husband is at work and their kids are at school. They hear someone break in and they need to protect themselves, but they do not have a gun because the government banned them. How are they going to protect themselves? The person breaking into their house will not stop and think: “Oh crap, it is against the law to break into someone’s house and hold them at gunpoint, I need to leave now”. Criminals do not follow laws. There has been a debate going on for years about whether or not we need more gun-free zones or more background checks when someone wants to buy a gun. There are people in the United States that want to amend the second amendment and there are people who want to get rid of gun-free zones. Getting rid of gun-free zones will help reduce crime in the United States and help create a safer home.

Lott points out that this case shows gun-free zones do not stop criminals from bringing guns into the buildings. The purpose of gun-free zones is to prevent violence, but the only thing those signs are accomplishing is attracting gun-handling criminals. Lott also acknowledges a good point when he claims, “Time after time, we see that these killers tell us they pick soft targets. With just two exceptions, from at least 1950, [almost] all the mass public shootings have occurred in these gun-free zones. From last summer’s mass public killers in Santa Barbara and Canada, to the Aurora movie theater shooter, these killers made it abundantly clear in their diaries or on Facebook how they avoided targets where people with guns could stop them.” If criminals themselves say they avoid going after locations where people with guns could stop them, then the only place they have left to go is gun-free zones. There are only two types of buildings in this world, one where guns are allowed, and another where guns are

The momentous of gun control is prodigious. There have been many situations where the use of a gun has had a major impact on one’s life. When someone is languished or going through a great cause of tribulation one’s first instinct is to regress to safety. On an early Wednesday morning, a fifty-three year old woman was encountered by a strange man, while she was in the shower, with a knife. Immediately the man and the woman engaged in a physical

Just the other day an off duty police officer was getting money from an ATM machine when out of the corner of his eye he saw a cashier frantically putting money into a bag with a man right in front of her. When the police officer presented himself as an off duty the man got down on his knees and said, “I’m not going to jail you are going to have to shoot me.” And as the man said that he was reaching into his back pocket for a gun, in doing so the police officer had to open fire killing the man. Now, people will be saying for this incident that the police officer potentially saved a life. But what many people do not know is that these types of stories happen all the time and of these stories the only time they are shared with the public is if it’s a man being killed(“Off-Duty Officer Shoots Man During Attempted Walgreens Robbery”). Many believe because of the so many deaths that guns are the problem that should be taken care of. But this paper is here to tell why it isn’t the guns fault for the deaths we have today.

People think that just by getting rid of guns they suddenly disappear but there only on flaw with that logic criminal don’t care if you say they can have a gun or not. In the US we have gun free zone these are areas that people who normally could carry a gun can't; these are places like schools, movie theaters, and military bases just to name a few. According to the FBI gun free zone are where 90% of mass shooting happen. The US is a bad examples because we have gun and criminal don't care about a sign that says they can't take a gun passed a point. The most tragic example of how gun free zone is Paris November 13, 2015, Paris a the strictest gun control in the world, but some terrorist didn't care about the law they struck an area where law abiding citizens are defense less. That guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens only leaves them defenseless but people don’t think of that when there saying get rid of all the

Harvard is an accredited Ivel lege school that is known for their vast area of research studies. This article explores how gun save lives as a form of self protection. Also the study shows how guns lower the crime rate, for they are seen as an intimidation factor. This information can be used to reinforce my thesis that gus are a right that are for personal protection. The statistical data of the decrease criminal acts do to the fear of guns being involved in shocking. I believe this article will strengthen my paper by providing real examples of how the simple fear of gun stops people from creating dangerous situations

Another thought you might want to think about and consider, is what if you have a gun in your home, and someone robs your house, and uses that to kill another person, or people? Or what if it’s your own children, or wife, or brother? What if they get ahold of that gun, to commit suicide? How would you feel then? You never know, what people are cable of doing. No matter how well you know someone, you don’t know what could trigger them, to take their life from the easy availability that they had, to reach for a gun. That crime, would be partly on your own sake. You might try to say after reading this, “well

Among many ways of prevention from high level incidents such as gun shooting crimes, one of the most important and helpful way is prevention through proper security laws. There is also a great quote that "prevention is better than cure". Prevention is almost considered as half the treatment of a particular disease. There are several problems and difficulties faced by people living in current society. One of the major diseases is the increasing trend of crimes like firearms and mass shooting.

In today's society we live in a dangerous world filled with mass shootings,rape, child molestation and other horrendous crimes. In today’s present, crime rates are skyrocketing higher than the previous generation. Everytime you look at your local news channel you see a crime has been committed. Everyone has a duty to protect themselves from these horrendous crimes. The most important asset a peace loving man can do to protect himself is to carry a gun. A gun offers protection from those dangers listed above that plague our society. Despite having a gun one must also understand that there are other protective measures to protect yourselves.

Lawmakers have recently implemented a new solution to the issue of mass shootings: gun-free zones. At first glance, this makes perfect sense. No guns means no gun-related violence, right? Could it really be that simple? Unfortunately, that is not the case. While gun-free zones have the potential to be effective in a perfect world limited to law-abiding citizens, that is not the world we live in today. Although you may initially agree with gun-free zones being put into effect and the purpose they are meant to serve, widening your perspective by considering opposing opinions could ultimately change your mind on the subject entirely.