Should Tighten The Freedom Of Having Firearms?

In America, guns have done great harm to society. Guns have been culprits to many different types of shootings such as Charleston, which was a shooting in a church, Sandy Hook, which was responsible for the deaths of twenty young children and six adult staff members, and the shooting in Aurora, Colorado during a midnight premiere of The Dark Knight Rises which resulted in the deaths of twelve innocent people. These are just three we listed here. How many times have there been news of another shooting? It’s like, everytime we turn on the news, we see another shooting that occurred. It doesn’t take a lot for one to notice that the current gun laws haven’t been working. The evidence which we all see daily in the news

The studies and research on gun control has opened up many ideas on how weak the current laws really are. Crime rates consist of high numbers. “Since 1982, there have been at least 62 mass shootings across the country, with the killings unfolding in 30 states from Massachusetts to Hawaii”

To solve the problem, I believe that instead of trying to ban weapons to prevent more mass killings, the government should employ modest but more strict firearm restrictions that can be enforced. But also, they should encourage private entities to step up their own lines of defence. I believe that method would help reduce the amount of killings because after 9/11, we made airport security more strict and also enforced more restrictions on what passengers could bring on the plane, instead of just automatically trying to ban the use of

I AFFIRM the resolution that “In the United States, private ownership of handguns ought to be banned.”

An ever increasing emphasis on the prevention of mass shootings has presented the option of gun control and bans. Mass shootings have occurred many times throughout history, but have

Each person has their own idea of what our founding fathers meant when they put this in our constitution. Some people use guns as a hunting sport or for food. But then there are the ones who want to cause harm to each other. I still remember the morning of December 11, 2012. The day the Clackamas Town Center shooting occurred. A man entered a busy mall, killed 2 people and seriously injured another. He ended up shooting himself after causing all that fear and pain to the shoppers. My family and I had planned to visit the mall that day to take my relatives who came to visit from California, but we overslept. We heard the news on the radio on our way there and we turned around knowing we could have been there. The culprit stole an AR-15 from

Some people believe that the United States is safer when citizens are not allowed access to guns. The amount of organized crime would go down because all of their power is derived from their use of firearms and that is a significant amount of their profit. Gun control laws protect children and families; Moms Demand Action, a grassroots group founded in response to the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School, believes guns in America are creating a public health crisis that is attacking children, citing statistics

Using this definition, a 2016 study published in the journal Violence and Victims reported that 292 mass shooting incidents took place worldwide between 1966 and 2012; nearly one-third of these were in the United States.”(DiLascio, 2017). The statistics are the answer to whether or not limiting firearms in The United States will help in the overall goal of limiting firearm violence. Other Countries such as England and Japan have more regulations on firearms and it limits the firearm related murders in those Countries. “Have some of the tightest gun control measures in the world, also feature some of the world’s lowest gun homicide rates (per 100,000 people, 0.04 killings and 0.03, respectively).The United States, by contrast, has a rate of 3.42 gun murders per 100,000 people-100 times greater than England or Japan” (Ballaro, 2016). Over the years gun crime has decreased a lot. “ Although gun crime declined steadily throughout the 1990s and early 2000s-thanks in part, perhaps, to the assault weapons ban still in force at the time-it increased sharply in 2005 and has been on a steady rise since. In 2008, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a bipartisan group of 300 US mayors, found that homicides from handguns were highest in states with the most lenient gun laws” (Ballaro,

More gun laws would have a negative effect on shootings and crime rates. Stricter gun laws would not prevent people from getting guns, would not prevent killings, and would not fare well with the people of the United States. Strict gun laws would only prevent law-abiding citizens from getting guns, and criminals would still be able to get them. Crime and shooting rates do not go down after increase in gun-restrictive laws are passed. People in the United States have the right to defend themselves from harm, and the 2nd Amendment right to own firearms.

Gun control should not exist at all in the United States. Mass shootings have almost become seen as normal event in the United States. What people do not understand is that gun control is not the answer; there are countries with little to no control that have fewer shootings. According to The Washington Post,Finland is ranked number 4 in countries with the most guns despite that they only had 24 homicides by firearm (“Gun homicides and ownership by countries” n.pag.) . In the article Did Gun Control Work In Australia “it is shown that gun control has reduced the problems but it still has not completely got rid of all firearm deaths”(Matthews n.pag.). The number of murders, homicides, or suicides do not go up due to people just owning more guns. Clayton Perry, a staff writer at the University of Maine, even points out “Stricter gun laws were in place during the Assault Weapons Ban between 1994 and 2004, but that didn't stop the shooters at Columbine in 1999 ”(Perry n. pag.). In Iceland, thirty out of a hundred people own a gun and they have zero homicides caused by guns a year(“Gun Homicides and ownership by country” n. pag.). In this day and age, everything is unpredictable, guns are a form of protection for everyone and there should not be restrictions on protection. The U.S. Department of Justice released a data brief that states, “ On average in 1987-92 about 83,000 crime victims per year used a firearm to defend themselves or their property”(Rand BJS Statistician n. pag.). The National Sheriffs Association released that the average police response time is at eighteen minutes while the average school shooting only last twelve minutes (“Embracing Technology To Decrease Response Time” n. pag.). Gun control should not exist because other countries do fine without it , high gun ownership has no link with increasing death rates , and guns are not harmful when instructions are followed.

Every day some news related to gun violence are being heard all over the world. Shooting in driveway, public places, schools, homicide and suicide are some of different types of gun violence. Shooting on people and killing them is a big issue in the world and different comments are provided about that. One of the most important of them is about gun control laws. Stingl (2013) says “The term gun control as it is used in the United States refers to any action taken by the federal government or by state or local governments to regulate, through legislation, the sale, purchase, safety, and use of handguns and other types of firearms by individual citizens.” According to this idea gun control laws should be

Kids, School and guns, the world itself conjures up images of bloodshed and death to some people. Yet instead of instilling fear into people, the American society has embraced guns and placed them in numerous homes under the pretense of protection. Which I am one of those American citizens that use their Second

Based on my research and my personal beliefs to answer this question I must look back in time. The 2nd Amendment was created in case of invasion the civilians could provide their own weapons to protect the country. We come a long way and now a day, there is no need to bear arms for a case of invasion. People carry weapons to protect their personal property, their family and as a hobby. Now back to the original question, do I believe that the government has the right to take guns away from civilians? No, I do not believe in that and perhaps, the Constitution of the United States would have to be changes. What I believe should be done, is prevention. If we would look at the cost of all the massive shooting in schools, theaters, churches we must observe and evaluate the whole story behind all the horrific incidents.

Why do mass shootings keep occurring? One problem is that we are too vulnerable to violence.

Imagine somebody breaking into your home with the intentions of hurting you and your family and trying to take all your valuables that you own in your house, and not having anything to protect your loved ones. Without the protection of a firearm, the intruder could injure or kill all members within the household easily. In the United States, according to the Bill of Rights, a citizen has the right to bear arms, however, recently people have started to believe that guns only incite violence and therefore gun laws need to be more strict. Although, If you own the firearm for the right reasons and go through the process of having a carrying license, then that is within your rights to protect yourself and be able to own the gun. Therefore,