Persuasive Essay On Gun Control

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

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.

October 1, 2017 marked the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history. With almost 500 injured and 58 killed, not only did Las Vegas feel the tragedy of a personal loss, but the incident had rippling effects that shook all of America (Flaherty). With the fresh wounds of the recent Las Vegas shooting, politician's initial reaction is to implement more strict gun restrictions and "lay down the law" to prevent a similar event from happening again. Due to the drastic laws being carried out, the topic of gun control is a current issue in society. Is the solution to implement more firm restrictions on gun ownership or can the government allow the people to be their own advocates? While the opposing views of pro-gun restrictions argue that is up to the discretion of the government, they are often narrow-minded resolutions with no hope to finding a real solution. This particular shooter obtained his guns legally and passed all background checks, going unnoticed until his plan unfolded. Establishing more strict firearm restrictions would not have stopped the Las Vegas shooting from occurring. The number of gun restrictions can not increase, the government needs to either fix the existing laws or do away with gun restrictions entirely. Gun restrictions are not the solution because guns are not doing the killing--people are, the laws only attack the law-abiding citizens, and the gun restrictions add another infringed upon right that the government controls. While voting against additional gun rules will not completely eliminate the controversy behind this topic, voting against these laws will be a milestone to regaining the rights we have already been promised.

Under the Obama administration, if someone could not work because of a mental disability and could not manage their own Social Security benefits, they were not eligible to own or buy firearms. This restriction is no longer in place, as the Trump administration

The debate over gun control in the United States has waxed and waned over the years, stirred by a series of mass shootings by gunmen in civilian settings. In particular, the killing of twenty schoolchildren in Newtown, Connecticut, in 2012 prompted a new national discussion about gun laws. However, legislation that would have banned semiautomatic assault weapons was defeated in the Senate despite extensive public support. In 2017, mass shootings at a music festival in Las Vegas and at a church near San Antonio have rekindled the gun control debate and invoked comparisons of U.S. gun policies and those of other wealthy democracies.

October, 1st 2017 has marked the latest in a now all too familiar trend of tragedies; a mass killing of civilians by a sick individual. In the wake of this tragedy, there is a mass of human emotion, grief, anger, sadness, and a demand for justice to right what has been wronged. In looking for justice, one needs an antagonist to blame, in this case an object, the gun. While it is true that firearms are the weapon of choice for many violent tragedies across the United States, will a ban on firearms truly solve the problem of violence for the country? Although a firearm ban may seem like a preventative for violence in the United States, a comparison of violent crime in other countries with varying levels of gun control, the lack of

People who are mentally ill should not possess any type of weapon. They could hurt themselves and other people. On April 16, 2007, Seung-Hui Cho, a Virginia Tech student, shot and killed 32 people and then himself at his school’s campus in Blacksburg, Virginia. According to CNN, “A Virginia judge in December 2005 deemed Cho "an imminent danger to himself because of mental illness" and ordered outpatient treatment for him, according to court documents” (“Campus Killer's Purchases Apparently within Gun Laws”). Cho’s mental illness did not prevent him from purchasing a substantial amount of guns and ammunition. If a law that required a mental health examination for gun ownership had been created, the mentally ill, Seung-Hui Cho, would not have been able to obtain the weapons and ammunition needed to massacre 32 students on the Virginia Tech

Raise your hand if you have ever been victimized by a gun or know someone who has lost their life due to a firearm. Realize that if gun control laws in the united states were more strictly enforced a lot less of us will be raising our hands right now. The United States has a problem with gun violence. Great mass shootings and also school shootings have occurred in the past few years, bringing a great grief to America. Parents are scared to send their children to school or even attend any type of event due to these horrific events that have happened. Some Americans even want to ban the right to bear arms.

The United States Constitution’s Bill of Rights states that the Second Amendment which is the right to bear arms which is allowing us to have weapons in our hands; many individuals are becomingly increasingly unsure of where the line is drawn on being able to have a gun and what prevents people from using them for harm. Some people have argued that even though the Second Amendment does protect our individual rights to have the option to own arms, that it should give the government authority to ban high-crime communities from using handguns. Gun violence embraces every town in the United States.

Gun control for who? Given the recent tragedy in Las Vegas, Nevada, where a lone gunman killed over 50 people and injured hundreds, the discussion of gun rights a dispute in the country’s storied culture wars will fail in any substantial changes to current laws. While I strongly dislike hearing of senseless deaths, especially when they seem preventable with proper legislation, however I know of gun control problematic racist past; not everything is black or white.

“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.

The first legislative attempt of gun control was in 1934; it started the fight between the National Rifle Association, who believed it was unfair to the law abiding citizens to limit their rights, and lawmakers wanting to limit the amount of crimes. The debate has grown and changed immensely t over the years, but the issue is still there (Magoon). This year in Colorado, Senator Vicki Marble, Representative Stephen Humphrey, and Representative Lori Saine have been the Prime Sponsors for the repeal of the ban of possession and sales of large capacity magazines (Repeal Ammunition Magazine Prohibition). This is known as Senate Bill 17-007; it states that part 3 of article 12 of title 18 of The Colorado Revised Statutes should be repealed and adds a safety clause stating that it needs to be implemented for the “public peace, health, and safety” (Concerning the Repeal of Certain Provisions Concerning Ammunition Magazines). Large Capacity Magazines (LCMs) are generally defined as holding ten rounds or higher, but in the case for Colorado it is defined as holding 15 rounds or higher (Large Capacity Magazines). SB17-007 was introduced January 11, passed through the Senate but was indefinitely postponed by the House as of March 22 (“Repeal Ammunition Magazine Prohibition - SB 17-007”). Senate Bill 17-007 will repeal the ban on large firearm magazines; it should be passed because the prohibition has not shown any decrease of deaths in mass shootings and infringes on America’s second amendment right.

Over 13,286 people yearly die from gun violence. In 2016 over 700 people were killed due to guns in the streets of chicago. Which is the most restricted place to purchase weapons. So they would get it from other ways. Such as buying out of state, or the black market. People would have to resort to these dangerous tactics if only there were less gun control laws. When there can be a simple solution that is not looked at. A solution that could completely fix the problem by the way it started.

Lately, there has been a controversy about gun control due to an increase is gun crime. With all the crimes throughout the years, many people don't know if we should have more laws for firearms or no more than what we have now. Within the last year, there has been about 53,000 incidents alone, but the year before was about 52,000 so not much of a difference of the two years. With mass shooting between the years 2014-2015 here is the only difference of eighty that had occurred and been reported, but yet with the accidental shootings, they are about equal with 2,000 that were reported (Past summary ledgers). The number of deaths that happened in 2015 was around 13,000 and in 2014, it was 1,000 less than that within the year gap. The new laws not only affect the people who oppose firearms but