Just Take Away Their Guns : A Critical Analysis

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.

On average, there is a shooting throughout the country where the victim was left defenseless each day. even with strict gun control laws set in by the federal government, many Americans still have faith in our second amendment. Gun control is proven ineffective, According to Richard Epstein of the New york University of Law, “We can confidently predict that crime will go up unless and until there is a vast expansion of the public police force.” (Epstein 1). While gun control law are in place there are still too many guns for the federal government to keep track of within the country, Richard Epstein states that “upwards of 200 million firearms of all descriptions are available for general use in the United States.” (Epstein 2). With recent

People who appreciate activities like shooting competitions and hunting, use firearms responsibly. This use contrasts with other uses, which often result in consequences that can be both intended and unintended. With past and present mass shootings, and acts of bloodshed perpetrated with the usage of weapons; has triggered a focus on gun control that once again has been brought into the spotlight. The purpose of the ongoing gun argument addresses the crimes that are committed with guns. This issue of gun control separated people into two groups: those who believe that carrying guns might prevent some crimes and fatalities, and those who don’t. There are individuals who believe absolutely the reverse: that more crime and deaths

Throughout this paper I will be challenging the arguments of Jeff McMahan’s paper Why Gun ‘Control Is Not Enough where he concludes that the only effective form of gun ‘control’ would be for The United States to make it illegal to shoot a gun of any type. He begins this argument by citing the “central pillar” of the argument for those who are anti-gun control is that when more individuals own guns, there is a mindset that the entire population is safer. With this logic, it can be inferred that citizens feeling unsafe in the current environment of their country are those seeking protection, one way being through the purchase and ownership of a firearm. Safety is imperative part of ensuring peace of mind, which then impact the peace of the

What cause crime? Is is an individual’s access to firearms or is it their willingness to act illegally given the opportunity? In this argumentative essay I will be discussing one of the most debated topics in the United States today, gun control. There are two extremely opposite views on this topic: the belief that guns enable crime, and the belief that guns deter crime. These polar opposites leave room for a very good discussion of what facts and truths may lie behind this topic. Throughout this essay I will be analyzing both sides of this issue.The significance of a topic such as gun control is very prevalent in today’s society. Some see it sad that we must argue over one of our supposedly deemed unalienable rights such as bearing a firearm.

Gun violence is one of the most serious problems in the United States. Each year in the U.S., more than 35,000 people are killed by guns, a death rate much higher than that in any other industrial nations. In 1997, approximately 70 percent of the murders in the United States were committed with guns. However, ironically, the United States also is the country that has the most gun control laws. Gun control laws generally focus on passing legislation—by local state, or national government—to restrict legal ownership of certain firearms. Seemingly, gun control laws may decrease criminals’ access to guns, but in fact the same laws also have their negative effects. Thus, the controversy over gun control is always heated. But my paper is not

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.

As one of the most controversial issues in today’s society due to the numerous tragic shootings around the world, gun control attracts many opinions. James Q. Wilson’s essay, Just Take Away Their Guns, features his solution to the dangerous dilemma and discusses his reasoning. He believes that eliminating the plethora of illegal guns in America would limit crime and shootings. Wilson feels that the most effective method would be police frisks, where they would search suspicious citizens for unauthorized guns. While one may question how successful this will be, James Wilson’s use of facts, tenable sources, and his exploration of all flaws in the idea make for a strong argument in favor of his plan.

Recently, the topic of gun control has been at the top of everybody’s list in regard to what this country needs to focus on. With the recent tragedies in Las Vegas and Orlando, some may claim that giving more people the ability to carry a concealed weapon would deter some criminals from committing crimes due to fear of failure. This theory was discussed and tested in an article by David Fortunato entitled, “Can Easing Concealed Carry Deter Crime?” This article shows results of many surveys and case studies completed within the US regarding topics like types of permits, ease of issuance, and the perceived number or carriers per state. It then goes on to break down this data, and draws a conclusion from it that may surprise some.

Hence, many would believe that gun purchases would plummet; however, the opposite has occurred. Gun manufacture has risen around 40% since then. These correlations show that the access to guns do not contribute to the violence. Another scenario many pro-Gun Control advocates dismiss is how the crime guns are obtained. In a study conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, data has shown around 79% of crime guns are obtained through friends/family or street/illegal sources; thus, if the criminals wanted to acquire firearms they will find a source. In the BJS’ survey only 8.3% of the offenders bought their guns from a retail store. The government can only prevent these delinquents from obtaining guns in registered sources like retail stores, pawn shops, flea markets, and Federal Firearm License (FFL) certified gun shows. The other option is to take away the 226 year old right to “bear arms” created by our Founding Fathers. Instead of taking away prerogatives of the United States civilians, the government should target illegal selling, purchasing, and trading of

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

In the essay “Just Take Their Guns Away,” James Wilson makes the claim that putting restraints on people legally buying firearms does not have any effect on the illegal usage of guns. According to Wilson “there are 200 million guns in private ownership, about one-third of them handguns.” He also states that confiscation of illegally owned guns would be a “Draconian” and impossible politically and would lower the influence the usage of guns used by criminals. He then states that the evidence he provides shows that self-defense is a legitimate form of deterrence. Wilson goes on to make the claim that handgun owners are more likely to shoot themselves or their loved ones. Wilson then claims that it should be the responsibility of the police to

In James Q. Wilson’s New York Times article, “Just Take Away Their Guns,” Wilson sufficiently reasons how the elimination of illegal guns on the streets should be the central focus in determining the limits regarding American gun control regulations which are frequently debated in our modern world. While Wilson makes an effective argument, at times, he racially profiles which is a definite form of deceptive reasoning; in addition, many of Wilson’s arguments lack the elaboration he needs to avoid making hasty assertions.

The controversial issue of gun control is one of the most debatable topics among politicians and civilians alike. This is because of the complexity of gun control and the long history that is related to the subject. Gun control is typically an effort, by the government, to create legislation that regulates the sale and use of firearms within the country. There are various arguments that surround this topic which include gun-related violence, accidents, self-defense, murders, suicide, constitutional rights, and so on. James Q. Wilson, a professor who has taught at Pepperdine University, Harvard University, and the University of California, Los Angeles, and a published author of several books, take a negative stance on the subject of gun control. Wilson contributed to the gun control debate in the last few years with his written op-ed article. According to Wilson, there is no possible method to eradicate the hundreds and millions of guns that exist within the country, restrictive gun laws will not significantly affect the United States’ murder rate, and that guns play an important role in self-defense in everyday lives. Contrary to what Wilson believes, strict gun control is necessary and should be enforced to ensure public safety because gun laws have the power to produce a positive outcome in the long run, reduce gun-related violence, and reduce the numerous risks that gun ownership open.

For many years, people have been pushing the American government to implement new laws that deal with gun control. Supporters of the argument claim that increased gun control will drastically reduce the crime rate in America. Nevertheless, a majority of gun control arguments are formed from strict control of data and emotional appeal. The mainstream media picks up these stories and broadcasts them to viewers without providing any context to them. While gun control activists assert that gun control is necessary, the American government should not ban guns because of the following reasons: potential vulnerability of innocent people being shot at by criminals and the inability for people to defend themselves against their own government.