The Importance Of Weapon Control In The United States

One of the biggest arguments against gun control is that it does not prevent criminals from committing violent crimes, such as murder. Based on information gathered by Argesti and Smith, this A Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) study showed that when a handgun ban was put in effect in Washington D.C. “the murder rate averaged 73% higher than it was at the outset of the law” (Argesti and Smith). Another report from the FBI showed that when Florida and Texas implemented a right-to-carry law, their murder rates dropped by 30 and 36 percent (qtd. in Argesti and Smith). It is blatantly obvious that areas with high crime will continue to have the same level of crime, even after the implementation of stricter gun control laws.

Gun control laws aim to restrict or regulate firearms by selecting who can sell, buy and possess certain guns. Criminals do not obey laws and stricter gun control laws or banning guns will have little effect on reducing crimes. There are many myths about gun control reducing acts of gun violence, which are simply not true according to research. People are responsible for the crimes, not the guns themselves. Taking guns away from United States citizens that use them for many reasons, shooting practice, competition, hunting and self-defense, should not be punished for the acts of criminals. As stated by Mytheos Holt, “Guns in the right hands help public safety. Guns in the wrong hands harm public safety”. Research shows that defensive use of

Current Gun Control regulations do not deter violence and crime. It has been shown that places that have relaxed their gun control laws have a higher crime and death rate. Data proves that homicide rates “[...] among the metro areas whose principal city is in a state that requires some form of permit to purchase a gun, is 4.32 per 100,000 residents, compared with 5.74 among cities in no-permit states”(Bailey). This is evidence that there is a correlation between gun control and death rates. It is also proven with statistical evidence that places with the least amount of gun control have the most violence. Statistics show that “‘none of the states with the most gun violence require permits to purchase rifles, shotguns, or handguns. Gun owners are also not required to register

A majority of the American people feel that gun control laws will help reduce crime rates because the waiting period would allow time for a person’s temper to cool down. They also feel that gun control will prevent repeat offenders because when a person tries to purchase a handgun, he will have to fill out a lengthy questionnaire. The questionnaire will include questions about the buyer’s past, for example, if they have a criminal record or a record of any mental illness. If there is a criminal record in that person’s history, he will not be able to make the purchase. Restricting handgun ownership would also reduce crime, because guns are used most often in robberies and murders (Mayer 28). They are very easily concealed under a coat, or even in the waistband of pants.

The amount of crimes happening today will only increase with stricter gun control laws because there is a higher temptation to steal guns. An American citizen claims, “Ever since I first learned how to shoot, the issue with gun violence around the nation became clear: Guns are not the problem; people are” (Sherfenski). Police need to lock up these people committing the disastrous crimes that affect so many innocent lives. These blameless people are not prepared when they are being attacked, and that is because most shootings tend to happen in areas where guns are controlled. The former United States Secretary of Education, William Bennett, explains the reason that criminals decide to go to places that have controlled gun laws is because: “These murderers, while deranged and deeply disturbed, are not dumb. They show up to schools, universities, malls and public places where their victims cannot shoot back” (Bennett). Even if guns are controlled in public places including malls and schools, where there are uncontrolled shootings, why would it make a difference if they were controlled everywhere? It would not make a difference whatsoever because these crimes are done out of pure, revolting pleasure. Committing a crime is one thing, but taking away a right that was given to Americans in the 1790s is a whole different story.

Although it is an American citizen’s right, protected by the second amendment, to possess firearms, the average civilian has no need for an excessive amount. The misuse of firearms has shown to negatively impact global society as a whole but most especially; the American citizen population. In the first decade of the twentieth century alone, the United States has seen an alarming growth of casualties due to the wrongful use of firearms. Gun control has become a controversial issue in the United States in a short amount of time, in order to further control the accessibility of firearms I propose in addition to background checks of both physical and mentals matters, for factors such as records of firearms in possession and number of firearms in possession to be taken into

he shootings that has happened all through the Unites States has made an great divide among Americans on what ought our country do to keep further shootings from happening. Numerous individuals trust that forcing new laws on how people buy weapons should require background verifications. Gun Control in the United States of America is a topic that has had lots of criticism and support by numerous citizens. The critical people of this topic trust that the guns don 't murder people, is that people kill people. The supporters of this topic trust that weapons lead to violence and a feeling of power over others. They additionally believe that if firearms were eliminated with from the public, then violence and death would diminish intensely in this nation. These two restricting perspectives leave the government open to a choice on whether or not to abolish one of our Constitutional rights, or to continue permitting individuals the privilege to possess a firearm. There are numerous issues that should be looked at in order to decide which laws are important.

The lasting fear resulting from the considerable number of armed conflicts involving the United States explains the citizens’ urge to protect the Second Amendment of the Constitution. 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”. This amendment is also the basis of a current political debate over guns consisting of two polarized sides, the advocates of gun control and the advocates of gun rights. Gun control advocates tend to believe that the Founding Fathers intended the Second Amendment for militias and increasing gun restrictions reduces gun violence. Conversely, gun rights advocates tend to believe that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to own guns, an individual needs guns for self-defense from threats, and gun ownership deters crime rather than causes more crime. American citizens frequently discuss the regulation of guns today due to the relation guns have to terrorism and mass shootings. Leah Libresco, a statistician, writes in her Washington Post article “I Used to Think Gun Control Was the Answer. My Research Told Me Otherwise” that gun control policies in their current state will make no apparent difference in the gun death rates. In opposition

As the famous Thomas Jefferson once said, “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms… disarm not only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” This quote is saying that removing guns from the innocent people will leave criminals armed, therefore supporting killings, meaning removing guns or making stricter gun laws will cause more deaths. I am against stricter gun laws for many reasons, two of which are people are ignorant and don’t know how hard it already is to purchase guns, and two, because people suppose guns are the matter when the problem is actually people themselves. In these past few years, we have seen school shootings all across the nation. This is due to people that have problems. Take Nikolas

Our hypothesis is that the ownership of guns has significantly added to more deaths in our country. In 2012, Follman stated that America has over 300 million firearms possessed by individuals (2). The increase of these weapons seems to be growing faster than the country’s population. The law is not stringent on persons purchasing guns and obtaining required license permit its usage. Likewise, guns sold in black markets are increasing over the years. It is buying a firearm even without a permit or any legal consent available. Over eight states consents to firearms in their bars. Hence, implying that an intoxicated person may use the weapon ‘‘in self-defense’’. Additionally, in states like Louisiana permit holders can carry their pistols in

Gun ownership is the most basic American right and also one of the most contentious social and political issues of now a days. There are almost 300 million of private-owned firearms in the US, in this nation there is almost one gun for every man, woman and child in America. The third part of America’s the population owned at least one gun. Many of these firearms were bought with home protection in mind, which makes sense because most of the owners buy guns to protect their families but most of them end up destroying it: in the right circumstances, a gun can be the first and most effective option line of defense against intruders and criminals.

Stats have shown that ⅔’s of all gun deaths are homicides and 1,700 spouses (prominently women) die from domestic abuse. These deaths are often caused by handguns that are more easily obtained than the large guns that movies and the media often popularized. Some opponents of this, state that when the handgun law was put in place that crime did not diminish in many states. These arguments forget to mention the fact that 37% of all guns that criminals have received are from family which means they often slip past studies and pure data recorded from the government. This means that crime could have diminished with the hand gun law but people with family who own guns started using them or giving them out more because it was harder to obtain them through the

among all other industrial nations. Next to automobile fatality, gun violence is the second leading cause of death by injury in the U.S. It should become first by the year 2003 unless something is done to prevent it. In the early nineties for example, four states -- Nevada, Virginia, Louisiana, and Texas had trends of gun injury as the top cause of death. This type of violence it seems is almost as epidemic as AIDS is in causing death. That is a very scary thing to consider. (gunfree.org) The National Center for Health Statistics reports that firearms have taken the lives of 35,957 people in the U.S. in 1995. There is a 21.5% firearm fatality increase since 1985. And, of these fatalities, suicides rank first at 18,503 people; homicides second at 15,835 people; unintentional shootings next at 1,225 people; and 394 were undetermined. (gunfree.org) Now I would like to demystify several arguments used against gun control. The first one assumes that gun control won't stop gun violence or crime. Most criminals get guns through legal means contrary to what the gun lobby says to justify having a huge availability of guns. This is proven by the Criminal Justice Research Center. They apparently surveyed that only 27% of adult inmates and 43% of juveniles have bought handguns illegally on the black market. On the other hand, of these inmates, 69% of adults and 55% of juveniles obtained guns through means like retail, gun shops, private

The theory of gun control has become a controversial topic due to recent mass shootings that call into question the safety of the people of this great country. The fact is that gun control does not work. The city of Chicago Illinois is a prime example. Chicago has some of the strictest gun control laws in the country, as well as one of the highest crime rates in the country. On the other hand in Kennesaw Georgia every resident in the city is required by law to own at least one firearm. Immediately after passing their unusual gun law crime rates fell dramatically, so much so that in two thousand eleven through two thousand thirteen there were no murders, twenty two robberies, and no rape cases. (Wm. Craig Graydon)

Nowadays, gun control is a hot and heavy topic. Some believe the laws should be stricter while others believe in the right to bear arms and nothing infringing that right. The people who believe in stricter laws are putting their main focus on murders, robberies, and other negative things that go along with any weapon. However, while guns are an accessory to murder, robbery, and many other crimes, they also have positive effects on people. For many people, guns have saved their lives, fed their families, and or made a lifelong career for them. By making gun laws stricter, that only affects the law-abiding citizens. Ironically, the criminals committing these violent crimes are still going to have guns. So, while criminals have guns, the law-abiding citizens are left helpless. Overall, gun control should be kept to a minimum because guns can positively develop individuals.