Essay on Gun Law Reforms

"Being Prepared in Suburbia" is an essay by Roger Verhulst published in 1992. The purpose of this essay is to show how guns can change a person's mind and emotions. Throughout the essay, Verhulst shares personal examples of his beliefs of gun ownership and personal examples of how his life changed once he bought a Crossman Power Master 760 BB Repeater pump gun. After purchasing the gun, he believed that the reason people like guns so much is because of a passion that gun owners feel. He stated, "This is the feeling that explains their passion, their religious fervor, their refusal to yield. It's rooted in the gut, not in the head" (Verhulst 342). He also realized that personal thoughts and morals about gun ownership change for a gun

The second amendment gives people the right to own a firearm. The founding fathers might have thought a gun was the best form of protection but many years have past since then and humans have evolved. Times are different and society is different. Technology has a big impact on people and how we think and all those variables can affect people with how they react in stressful situations. We have to consider the mental stability of those in possession of the weapons, it is important to keep the weapon away from loved ones or other people, and is the law protecting those in possession of the weapons or putting lives in more danger.

result in death. However, this doesn’t count all of the injuries not reported to police. This

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.

One of the most controversial issues in our society today is the topic of private gun ownership and gun control laws. This controversy has arisen mostly due to the different ways that the second constitutional amendment is interpreted. The amendment states that "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" (Lott, 2000). On one side of the issue, there are those that believe that the amendment guarantees the right of individuals to possess and carry a wide variety of firearms. On the other side are those that contend that the amendment was only meant to guarantee to States the right to operate militias.

We know that states with the most gun laws tend to have the fewest gun deaths. So the notion that gun laws don’t work, or just will make it harder for law-abiding citizens and criminals [to] still get their guns is not borne out by the evidence.

Gun laws have been debated for years now in America, and they have been debtated for various reasons. Recently, the idea of conceal and carry has been brought over to college campuses and schools around our nation. There are two main sides to this controversial topic, people who are for conceal and carry and people who are against it. There have been multiple bills proposed in florida to allow everyday people carry guns on campus. This topic has been a hot debate after incidents like the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting and even more recently the Ohio State shooting. Although the “Right to Bear Arms” is an amendment, conceal and carry should not be allowed onto college campuses and schools due to its potential consequences.

Anyone who believes strengthening the gun control laws would reduce gun violence is correct. However, if someone wants to kill someone, not having a gun is unfortunately not going to stop him or her. If a gun is not accessible, a person who wishes to kill someone will use another weapon that is accessible, such as a knife or bludgeon of sorts. Banning guns will lessen gun violence, but will bring up a rise in violence with other weapons.

America is the most well armed nation in the world, with American citizens owning about 270 million of the world’s 875 million firearms (Marshall). Indeed, this is more than a quarter of the world’s registered firearms. The reason why Americans own so many guns is because of the Second Amendment, which 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.” (Rauch) This amendment guarantees U.S. citizens the right to have firearms. Since this amendment is relatively vague, it is up for interpretation, and is often used by gun advocates to argue for lenient gun laws. Hence, gun control is a frequently discussed controversial topic in American politics.

Public policies are developed in response to the existence of a perceived problem or an opportunity. The analysis delves into a public issue or problem and assesses a set of proposed government action for addressing the issue. The job of the analyst is to describe the background and status of an issue and then, using research and analysis, determine a proper government action to resolve the issue. By comparing options and weighing their expected benefits, the analyst should conclude with a recommended course of action or inaction to addressing the issue.

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.

One of many controversial topics in the United States is gun control. It is clearly written in the Second Amendment of the Constitution that the people will have the right to bear arms. Recently; however, people have been misusing those firearms and have been harming others with them. The government is trying to regulate the sale, distribution, and ownership of guns because of this reason. Some of the arguments being made by the politicians is simply if the government has the right to be able to control, and if it does, the effectiveness of the public policy to regulate guns.

Former Governor of New York Eliot Spitzer once said "Yes, people pull the trigger - but guns are the instrument of death. Gun control is necessary, and delay means more death and horror". Spitzer’s words makes one think: should we fear the person behind the gun or the gun itself? The majority of violent crimes that happen in America are not only caused by a criminal, but also the weapon in which the criminal is holding. America’s gun violence problem stems from the increasing accessibility of firearms. Many of the mass shootings in America could have been prevented if access to semi-automatic and automatic weapons were completely banned. Gun violence is an arising issue, and a change needs to be made concerning the gun laws in the U.S. Stricter gun control laws is necessary to prevent high accessibility to firearms and mass shootings, also research shows that Australia’s strict gun control laws are proven to be more efficient in preventing gun violence.

It is essential that the United States government implement the following three policies to protect the lives of its citizens: mandate a gun amnesty program, require owners to pass tests and insure their weapons, as well as prevent persons lacking mental capacity from possessing such deadly weapons.

Perhaps I should have been a bit more detailed in what I meant by "Cops had been going around taking people's guns...." I was not talking about was legal confiscations on privet property at Super dome. I was talking about the cops going around to people homes and taking the guns from the the gun owners at their homes with and without them there.