Police Officers Should Not Carry Guns

The American society has for long struggle with the debate and issue of private gun ownership. There are the advocates proposing lenient laws to allow more gun possession while the people against it calling for stringent laws to control the situation. For many centuries, since the enactment of the Second Amendment and even during the slavery period, gun ownership remains an issue to debate. The negative effects have been the harassment of the minority and the vulnerable as well as increased crimes. On other hand, it has helped promote the security of the people and ensure there is no violation of people’s rights to own guns as required by the Second Amendment. As such, gun control and ownership remains a controversial and hot topic of discussion

Ms. Hasselstrom has ethical appeal because she used credible personal situations to support her authority to possess a gun. Because she was such a peace-loving woman, carrying a gun would be a fallacy. Her stated cause and effects gave this article logical appeal on the subject of carrying guns for safety purposes. Although she establishes good

There are many reasons that teachers should not carry firearms. One reason is that children like to get their hands on absolutely everything, especially children who are younger. Many children love to allow their imaginations to run wild. They like to search for

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

Gun control has been a debatable issue for all times. This essay aims to put forward an argument against gun control. The essay asserts that prevalence of gun control should not be a part of the society. Society should be against gun control because people should be able to protect themselves, the crime rate would decrease, and people have the right to bear arms.

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.

The matter of gun control has become an increasingly controversial issue. Whenever, a nationalized tragedy ensues that involves gun violence, the question on what to accomplish regarding America’s gun control takes center stage. While exploring this topic, this essay will attempt to discuss the circumstances that prohibit a person from possessing firearms, also regulations to prevent these persons from possessing firearms. Upon reflecting on the personal side of the gun control debate, stricter gun control begins to infringe upon our rights, as citizens and they should concentrate on enforcing the current laws in the books, instead of making additional laws.

A standout amongst the most warmed and talked-about about issues in this day and age is that of weapon control. In recent past years, there’ve been many cases reported in light of gun use. Since then there are debates going on either there should be gun control bills. There have been high quantities of passing’s including guns in the United States, and individuals are starting to stand firm against the savagery and search for approaches to take care of the issues. Firearm control is exacting stricter and more brutal directions on owning and conveying guns, which numerous individuals accept is the answer. In any case, arguers trust that the privilege to have firearms is a piece of each American 's sacred rights. Gun laws are the reason for much rough wrongdoing in America, and they should be changed to make it less demanding for Americans to buy handguns, convey them as hid weapons, and better protect themselves.

American citizens have been given a right to firearms, and this right should not be infringed. Opponents of this right to firearms argue that, citizens should not be allowed the right to firearms. Their main reason is that, it will help curb violence cases by guns. This has been challenged because; criminals will still acquire firearms illegally and continue terrorizing citizens because, they are fully aware that, they are not armed. Moreover, according to Winkler (89), “Guns do not kill people; it is people who kill people,” and so, denying citizens the right to own guns will not stop any violence. Likewise, the society will not be safe as there will be an increase in violence and criminal activities because the citizens have no firearms to defend themselves.

Gun control laws should regulate production, distribution, ownership and use of firearms by civilians. Gun control laws are not intended to dispossess law abiding citizens of licensed firearms but to intervene on reckless use of firearms that cause harm to the public. Gun control should also make it difficult for criminals to access firearms. Armed civilians have in many instances deterred acts of crime from being instigated by scaring away criminals. Nonetheless, gun laws can only be described as immensely lax. This essay seeks to argue for the enactment of strict gun control laws by highlighting the dangers posed by guns in the hands of members of the public.

Police brutality has been a very controversial matter these past few months, with citizens supporting those who claim to be victims, and others who don’t. Though most people have been supporting the victims, some people who don’t can agree that police having guns with them in a simple investigation is a little over done. There are many instances where an officer can be seen, from a citizen’s camera, approaching the door to ask about a crime that was committed in the neighborhood, only for the citizen to open the door, with their pet acting hyperactive and the animal is shot. Officers always respond with what seems to be the same response, “The officer had the right to protect himself.” Though this is true, pulling out a gun and shooting the unknowing animal is a little much, don’t you think? Usually right afterward, the officer tells the owner of the animal that their now dead pet will be picked up, then walks away. This is where the big question of this topic comes in, “Should Police Officers keep their guns at all times?” This includes stopping a car, investigating a house, and other seemingly not as dangerous tasks. Though I agree any officer should protect himself, I’m sure I’m not the only one who thinks that the officers can and should use their Taser or Pepper-Spray to slow down the oncoming threat instead of simply pulling out their gun to kill the person or animal.

The issue of gun control dates back to the 17th century. There have been debates whether the government of the United States should adopt gun control or not and whether it is good for its citizens or not. As a result, two opposing groups have been formed; one supporting guns control and the other one against. According to statistics a big percentage of crimes committed in the United States are as a result of possession of guns and other firearms among citizens. In surveys carried out since 1999, over 20% of gun owners said that they owned the guns for protection. According to them, they use the guns to protect themselves against the increasing crimes. However, not all gun owners use the guns for protection; some use them to commit crimes thereby bringing in the issue of gun control. The United States government need to formulate laws and regulations to control gun ownership especially pro-guns (Spitzer p34-35).

The issue of gun is always controversial. Firearm can be used as defending or an assaulting weapon. In United States, firearm increase the rate of homicide, suicide and gun violence, which can harm and murder people. Moreover, taking away people’s gun will not work effectively because the murder and criminal will find another ways to get guns. Also, the black market will appear for the people who cannot get guns from regulated markets. In addition, if regulated guns are banned, murderers may use other tools as weapon including pencil, knife, and a car. The government should not take away the gun from gun owners, while increasing the difficulty of the background check to screen gun buyers is the most effective way. In fact, most people do not want to give up a weapon that can defend their family and property in the long history of legalized gun of United States. Gun control or heavily regulated gun laws is not suitable for residents because people need firearm to protect their family, self-defense, and against the murderers who may often seek buying illegal guns from black market. Firearm can be used as protection in our life.

In the past year, I am sure that you have heard about the issue of gun control. Well, do you really know the full story behind the debate? My goal for this essay is to fully explain everything to you behind this issue and why it is such a big deal in our world today. There are many different problems behind why gun control is such a big issue in the world today, and why some people want gun control and others do not. Through these contrasting opinions on gun control, the world will never fully decide what is completely right.

And before I get bombarded with a wave of ambiguous questions and angry protests saying “How many times do we hear of policemen being killed, surely guns could stop all this?” No. They couldn’t. Even more people would have needlessly died if the policemen were to have pulled out a gun as youths get even more scared at this and it can lead to reckless actions from both the policemen and the guilty party. There would also be mistakes, and with armed policemen, this could lead to innocent people being shot. This can happen either by mistake because the armed officers are acting on inaccurate information, or because they are bystanders caught in the cross-fire of a shoot-out. If we arm everybody, it would also mean that there would be less training in gun control, so mistakes would rise there. The world saw this in cases such as the Amadou Diallo shooting in New York in 1999, or the shooting of Jean Charles De Menezes at Stockwell underground station in 2005. Would we like more of these to happen? All those that would vote for