Persuasive Essay On Gun Control

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.

Compared to other countries, the U.S.A. accounts for more than 30% of mass shootings worldwide. By itself this statistic would be incredibly alarming, and paired with the fact that the U.S. contains only 5% of the world’s population it is absolutely terrifying (Gallagher 2). Part of the reason that mass attacks are so prevalent may be the readily accessible supply if firearms. This fact brings one to the logical conclusion that gun control is a policy that our representatives in the government need to consider thoroughly. While i do understand that this idea is even harder to accomplish in practice than it is to comprehend in theory, it is a direly needed first step to making our country a safer place to live.

One misconception when viewing Gun Control would be the intent to ban all firearms. This is not the intended goal. However, the ban of Rifles and special ammunition that are only designed for killing a mass number of people is the target. These weapons have no purpose in the hands of American citizens. In the article 'End the Gun Epidemic in America' by The New York Times it states that these weapons obtained for mass murdering are "weapons of war" and "are designed specifically to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency. These weapons can't be used for hunting so they provide absolutely no purpose for American civilians. The new law would require the many Americans who have obtained these weapons to give them up, which many claims to be an invasion of their second amendment and constitutional right. However, if it is for the safety of American lives, then that is the price we must pay as a country to keep each other safe.

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.

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

I want each and every one of you sitting here to imagine how it would be like if there is a person sitting next to you with a concealed handgun. Would you be fine with that or would you tremble in fear just like me and wonder if this would be the last moments of my life. People often claim that owning a gun would make them feel safer, but have they ever thought about how people around them would feel. Therefore today, I am here to talk about why the Texas legislature should repeal Senate Bill 11 which is campus carry. I have done research trying to understand the challenges we students would face with the help of Internet. So today, we would take a brief look at what campus carry is? Secondly, we will talk about the reasons why we do not need such a bill in our campuses. Thirdly, few ideas and plans on how we could stop this bill. And last but not least talk about the practicality of our plan.

Assault rifles are becoming the weapon of choice in these recent mass shootings. Since 2004, out of 48 mass shootings 13 of them included assault rifles. The assault rifle can be bought in many states starting at the age of 18. According to the gun control group, since 2009 individuals under the age of 21 committed two mass shootings with an assault rifle. Only one of the two rifles used was bought legally, which means just a single shooting where at least four individuals were shot and slaughtered could have been prevented. Everytown for Gun Safety reports, since 2009 there have been 156 mass shootings, eleven of these shootings were committed by individuals under the age of 21. Out of those 156 incidents 11 of those the shooter used an assault rifle. Although You have to be 21 to

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.

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

With all of the conclusions stated up to this point, the future in the United States does not look promising for responsible U.S. citizen gun-owners. The government does not appear to be heading towards the diminution of the strict gun control laws. With the new laws being issued and put into effect around the years of 2013-2014, all United States citizens that legally own firearms now must register all of their personally owned guns to the government. The recent date of 1 April 2014 has just passed, but this day stood the date when a long gun "eligibility certificate" is required to be issued to all citizens owning a gun that is not a handgun (General Statutes of Connecticut). The government believes that it is solving its firearm-related crime

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.

Many Republicans are strongly opposed to any kind of gun control and many Democrats are pushing for gun ban laws. I believe America needs to find a middle ground and a gun reform plan should be put into action. Maybe we could take lessons from other areas around the world that have had success with gun reform.

Gun control will not protect United States citizens any more than having no gun control, it will keep the guns away from the responsibility, and do nothing to prevent criminals from obtaining them. Numerous natives and government officials trust that firearm confinements will diminish murder rates and wrongdoing greatly; nonetheless, this isn't the situation. If a citizen has the intent to commit a crime, then they will do what is necessary to get it done such as getting a gun. Even though it is illegal. They are already committing crimes so there are no consequences of getting a gun. Gun control laws will not protect this country because law abiding citizens will not obtain guns, but those citizens will not commit any crimes,

Gun control will not protect United States citizens any more than having no gun control, it will keep the guns away from the responsibility, and do nothing to prevent criminals from obtaining them. Numerous natives and government officials trust that firearm confinements will diminish murder rates and wrongdoing greatly; nonetheless, this isn't the situation. If a criminal has the urge to commit a crime, they will got to all stakes to obtain a gun. Even though it is illegal. Gun control laws will not protect this country because law abiding citizens will not obtain guns, but they will still find ways to cause commotion; therefore, there is no point of keeping guns out of their hands."Over the last three years, Minnehaha and Pennington

Japan, June 8, 2001, 10:15 in the morning at Ikeda Elementary School. Thirty-Seven year-old former janitor Mamoru Takuma entered the school with a kitchen knife and began stabbing numerous school children and teachers. “It lasted just 10 terrifying minutes, during which the intruder killed eight children, injured 15 other pupils and two teachers and further eroded Japan's confidence that it is immune to the violence that it associates with the U.S.” (Tim Larimer) This proves that people wouldn’t need a firearm to create chaos. Japan is one of the strictest countries about firearms. No one is allowed to own a rifle or assault rifle. The Japanese community is allowed only to own shotguns and air rifles, but the process to own one of these is a very long and hard process to finish. What this has to do with America is to give an example that you wouldn't need a firearm to create chaos bringing up the controversy about gun control. Because so many U.S.