Persuasive Essay On Gun Control

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.

The tenth amendment gives all powers that are not explicitly listed as the powers of the Federal Government, to the states and to the people. Under this amendment, states have the access the make, appeal, and rewrite laws as long as they do not contradict federal laws or the rights given to the people by the constitution. The rights given to the states, under the tenth amendment, is the reason that there has been a lot more gun control, regulation decisions, and laws made at the state level rather than a federal level. States have a tendency to create more laws and regulations on gun control because it is a problem that more closely relates to the state itself and the regulations needed depends on each state independently. Some states have a population that agrees with more strict gun regulations and other states agree on more loose gun regulations. This variation from state to state has a tendency to create the migration of guns over state borders. “States with strict gun regulations tend to import more guns while states with lax gun policies tend to export more gun” (Lee, 2015, p.141). While guns are illegally migrating across state borders to supply the people in states with more strict gun regulations with guns, there is also a flocculation in the economies of the state’s due to supply and demand. The people in the states with more strict gun policies are willing to pay more for a gun because there is a lower supply of them, causing them to give

Although the Second Amendment prevents the federal government from completely banning guns in America, limited restrictions are allowed on the distribution and possession of firearms. Certain groups of people such as criminals, the mentally unstable, and soldiers dishonorably discharged from the military are prohibited from possessing or interacting with firearms (Flynn). These restrictions are enforced by background checks in some states on both a state and federal level. However, gun laws vary from state to state and are often not thorough enough; the background checks are flawed due to lack of information and misinformation, and guns can easily end up in the hands of criminals and malevolent individuals. The ease of

The Second Amendment 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 right to bear arms allows citizens to own and carry a fire arm. Not because it looks cool but to protect citizens from an oppressive government. It’s good to know if something drastic happens some citizens can protect themselves from others who are dangerous. The United Sates is one of the largest countries with the most firearms, and with that being said gun violence has gotten out of hand. This doesn’t mean that the second amendment is the cause of it.

From 1988 to 2001, the usage of anti-depressant drugs in the general public increased by four-hundred percent (Swanson). The mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary took place in December of 2012, and during 2014, firearms were used in 88 percent of teen homicides, and 41 percent of teen suicides (“Suicidal Teens”). On February 28th, 2017, the Trump administration repealed a firearms regulation that prevented mentally disabled persons from owning guns. At the same time, teenage mental illness is on the rise, specifically in cases of depression and anxiety. A report from the Surgeon General shows that over 90 percent of adolescents that committed either suicide or homicide have or had a mental disability. Mental disabilities such as depression and anxiety put teenagers at a high risk for homicides and suicides. Teenagers who are stressed due to school, lack of parenting, puberty, bullying, and other factors can develop depression, anxiety or another mental illness. Allowing these teens easy access to firearms proves time and time again to be very dangerous. In some cases, the families of these teens have never been assessed to see if they can responsibly store firearms. The only background check performed is on the owner of the firearm, meaning that a person may own the weapon even if another family member living with them legally cannot. Loose gun control laws allow families with physiologically ill children to have access to firearms, without first checking to see if the disabled children in the home are responsible enough to be around said firearms. Repealing gun control laws instated by the Obama administration will cause an increase in adolescent firearm-related homicides, suicides, and tragedies similar to the one at Sandy Hook Elementary.

On October 1st 2017, Steven Paddock shot and killed 58 people at a country music festival in Las Vegas, Nevada. Over the course of 12 minutes, Paddock committed the worst mass shooting in modern American history. We must honor the victims and respect their memory, but we have to ask ourselves what we will do to prevent this in the future. The first and completely valid response to that question is enacting stricter gun control, but there is much more than that. We can increase funding for mental health treatment, we can take stricter security measures at hotels and concerts, however there is something major that needs to be changed that hardly ever gets talked about. It’s something that we are used to, that we have seen all throughout our

Gun control is one of the most talked about topics in modern day America. 43 of 50 states have the right to bear arms. Most states have to background check you in order for you to purchase or sell guns. Some other states prevent carrying guns and some other ban assault rifle weapons. People who support the gun laws say that the second amendment was meant for militias and that gun restrictions have always existed. People who oppose that say that guns are needed for self-defense from people who invade houses or are actual threats. Although both of those are correct, there will always be two sides for control laws.

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

“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.

A common controversial topic that is discussed universally is the issue of shootings and gun use. Citizens views on the topic range from the wishes to completely ban guns, to the total allowance and ownership of such items. In comparison, some drugs may be illegal, although people still possess them. Would the same be for guns? Should more be done to implement the control over guns? Or should more freedom be given to gun owners? One can visualize the positives and negatives regarding gun control by learning more about the following: the suspected terrorists list, the black market, increase in gun crime, rarely using guns for self-defense and how extensive background checks would prohibit unqualified people from obtaining firearms.

We see and hear about it on the news how someone shot and killed someone and we all think why do people do that or what gives them the idea to just go out and take another living human life away. Then the issue is would it be better to make Gun-control even more strict so that the deaths caused by gunshots could lower? So when people do bad, other people look for a solution on what to do and the idea that keeps getting tossed up is to make Gun-control more strict so it doesn't happen as often. But this shouldn’t be the case since there will always be gun violence. The issue isn't the gun, the issue is who wields it and uses for harm instead of protection. Then will this person who has a gun will he/she be mentally stable enough to use it

Can you imagine waking up at three in the morning to the sound of your front door being kicked in, and police swarming in to your home, on a mission to remove all your legally obtained firearms, while ripping your house apart? I can’t, but that is what it seems like NRA activists imagine happening at the mere mention of gun control. Those two words seem to ignite the same “fight or flight” reaction as the boogie man to all my fellow gun-toting Americans. However, I believe that there is a way to bring those for and against gun control to a common ground by improving background checks, restricting gun shows, and banning semi-automatic rifles.

According to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, “if the FFL has not been notified within three business days that the sale would violate federal or state laws, the sale may proceed by default.” Three days is not a sufficient period of time to comprehensively assess someone’s mental condition and their ability to safely carry a gun. Another problem regarding mental health background checks is the number of mental health cases that go unreported. Without records detailing a prospective gun buyer’s mental health, there is insufficient evidence to prevent them from buying a firearm. In terms of criminal history, the three-day rule still applies. Additionally, background checks are only mandatory through federally licensed firearms dealers. If ex-convicts were to buy from private sellers, they could buy firearms unrestricted by legislation. The lack of legislation surrounding mental health and criminal history background checks increases the likelihood of firearms falling into the hands of those more likely to abuse

How many people have to die before this world will let go of these dangerous weapons? The Chinese invented gunpowder in the 9th century which lead to the creation of guns. A repeating firearm is a firearm that holds more that one cartridge and can be fired more than once between chargings. Gun control should be enforced more because it will help prevent violence, it can help stop crime, and although some people may argue that gun control should not be enforced because guns can help save people’s lives but they are wrong because people misuse guns.