The Pros And Cons Of Gun Control

With an increase in the number of mass shootings that have occurred in the United States in the last few years the issue of gun control laws has become a prevalent topic of debate throughout American society. This debate stems from two opposing arguments over gun control. Some feel gun control laws are fair and not the contributing factor to these mass shootings, whereas, others feel that there is an urgent need for strict laws in order to end the problem of mass shootings. There are numerous pros and cons to the enforcement of stricter gun control laws but we must note a few things: stricter gun control laws would interfere with the second amendment, it is not the gun that kills it is the individual, and it is ultimately not laws that are

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "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." Courts have universally agreed, however, that the right provided by the Second Amendment is not absolute and that many kinds of gun legislation designed to protect public safety remain valid ("Gun Safety & Public Health," 2013). The ongoing debate between the gun rights versus gun control has caught more attention as number of cases involving gun violence increased significantly. In one study, it stated that major mental illnesses are associated with increased risk of violent act. In recent years, there were several news headlines on

“Gun are designed to kill. They have no other function” (Bowman and Newton). Today, there is a major debate whether or not guns should be legalized or stay legal. The Second Amendment allows people to right to bear arms, but many people disagree with that and to express their opinions, both sides protest. Guns have a long history in the United States. They were made for military purposes and are now used for anything a individual wants to use it for, like for example hunting. Stricter gun control laws should be enacted because they will cause fewer deaths, save money, and for increased public safety.

Despite centuries of evidence that gun control laws do not lower crime, stop violence, or make society safer in any way, gun control advocates continue to chip away at our Second Amendment rights. For a group (yes, liberals) who typically don’t care for hard work, working hard to rob us of our freedom to keep and bear, seems to suit them just fine.

Gun Control has been a long debated, and hot topic among the American population for many decades. The 2nd Amendment to the United States Constitution states that, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. Both sides of this debate have very logical arguments for increasing gun control or lessening gun control. These arguments tend to spike shortly after active shooter events, eventually having some type of legislature passed to prevent these atrocious acts from happening. But ultimately active shooter events continue to plague the United States, and much of the world.

The Second Amendment is not an unlimited right to own guns. Gun control laws are just as old or older than the Second Amendment (ratified in 1791). Gun control is an argument much debated in the United States of America today. Recent events such as the shooting in Connecticut elementary school and the shooting in a Colorado theater at an early morning screening of "The Dark Knight Rises" have persuaded many government officials to support gun control laws. However, many government officials still hold to the 2nd Amendment, which bluntly states, "... the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." This being part of the Constitution, it bears a lot of credibility. However, I don't believe this is right. The government should not control guns rights to extremes, but it shouldn't let us have too much freedom.

“I have a very strict gun control policy: if there is a gun around, I want to be in control of it” (Clint Eastwood). Every year according to ATF statistics, over six million guns are sold on average in the United States alone. As of 2015, gunviolencearchive.org reported 46,350 incidents related to firearms. Out of those incidents 11,664 deaths were attributed by a firearm. “Staggering numbers on both fronts with no resolution in site. 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” many have challenged this right, and it has become one of the most controversially debated subjects to date.

The arguments of those in favor of gun control are primarily based on numbers- the statistics. The New York Times stated that the United States has more guns and more gun related crimes than any other developed country. A recent study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention proved that the nation had more that 33,000 firearm deaths; more than 70% of all homicides and 50% of all suicides. Currently, it is incredibly easy to buy a gun. In fact, there are more restrictions on buying a pet (these include a minimum age, personal references, ID check, and a home check) than a gun. For this reason, gun control advocates desire fewer guns, better records of who owns them, and higher restrictions on the purchase of a gun. This compromise will not completely abolish the right to bear arms, but will make it less available. The advocates believe that the more people carry guns, the more likely it is for a shooting to occur. This belief is rising with the escalating amount of mass shootings. A mass shooting, as defined by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), is "four or more shot and/or killed in a single event [incident], at the same general time and location, not including the shooter." In 2016, 31% of all mass shootings occurred in

Gun control, it’s a common topic that gets thrown around debates very often, whether the second amendment should remain legal or it should be banned in the United States. I, among many law abiding citizens, prefer to keep the second amendment within our government just like it has been since our founding fathers signed the Declaration of Independence. However, with this law still in place, it also means anybody over a certain age, depending where they live in the United States, can buy a gun. This puts me on edge because not everybody in our nation is a very self-controlling person, regardless of their gender, ethnicity, religion, and so on. This brings back those tragic moments in our generation such as the Newtown School Shooting, where a man walked into an elementary and shot little boys and girls, and also teachers. Or that time when the man shot many innocent bystanders inside the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando with a rifle and handgun. That is why there should be strict background checks for anyone who is going to buy a firearm, because it’s important to know just who exactly is going to buy a gun.

The Second Amendment of the Constitution has drawn a great deal of criticism especially in recent years. The topic of gun control is controversial throughout these past few years because of the many mass shooting being committed through the the use of guns. 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.”(“Guns and Violence”, 2016) I came about this issue because of the recent events that took place involving guns causing a mass shooting done by a person legally allowed to get weapons. This even made it seem as if weapon killing innocents are the norm in the United States because of all the mass shooting that have taken place throughout the past few years. I wanted to do research on what would happen if there are gun control laws placed in the U.S government, would it make America a safer place or a more dangerous place. “Expanding background checks for gun purchasers to a wider range of gun sales was also judged effective and popular. It is an idea that was considered by Congress in 2013, but failed to win enough votes to become law (Bui, 2017).” This quote got me thinking why do people not want to limit gun control if it might help the safety of Americans. Gun laws need to be changed so that guns are harder to obtain for those who are not deemed fit to hold a gun and allowed for those to carry as a method of protection from the government from overpowering us and from criminals.

Although I did not agree with the article How Gun Control Advocates Could break the NRA’s Blockade by Ronald Brownstein, it states some points that were hard to refute about gun control and that helped shape my argument. My stance on gun control is that we should not ban guns as a whole, but have more of a centralized approach on how people can obtain a gun. Being an American citizen allows you with certain alienable rights that are outlined by the Bill of Rights. We as a nation were given these rights at the creation of our great nation based on the fact that all men were created equal. Some of the rights that are given include things such as, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, and the right to bear arms. The Bill of Rights was made because they wanted to place specific limits on government power. The author of the article is suggesting that we as a nation should ban all types of guns. This topic of banning guns or not banning guns is important because in recent events there has been a lot of mass shootings that have ended lives too early. These mass shootings are becoming more and more common the number of people that have been killed by guns within the last year has been four hundred and sixty-one. Also, there have been over three hundred mass shootings in the last 477 days.

Recently there has been a renewed debate about whether or not gun control could be a legitimate way to reduce the violence in the United States. Like any debate there are two sides: one for gun control and one against it. Recently, the pro gun control side has argued that the recent mass shootings and general violence is a result of our country’s minimal gun control. And although this may seem like a reasonable argument, in reality it is an overgeneralization; there are many other factors that lead into horrific events like mass shootings. On the other side, those who want gun freedoms have argued that gun control laws are a violation of citizen’s constitutional rights. But when the facts are looked into more it is clear that generalized gun control is not a good solution because guns do not kill people, people kill people.

Gun control has become a pretty big argument. More now so than it ever has before. About 68% of registered voters want there to be stricter gun laws. That totals to be about 2 out of 3 people chose to have it (Shepard, Steven). As to where 25% chose to keep gun laws from being stricter (Shepard, Steven). The other 7% are the people who could care less (Shepard, Steven). I personally think that gun control is a bad idea, it's just another thing the government wants to be able to say yes or no to.

The reason that I chose this topic is lately becoming a controversial issue among the society. While some are for more laws to control the use of guns, others are entirely against this approach. Personally, I am for strict laws that can limit the use of firearms.

For many years, people have been pushing the American government to implement new laws that deal with gun control. Supporters of the argument claim that increased gun control will drastically reduce the crime rate in America. Nevertheless, a majority of gun control arguments are formed from strict control of data and emotional appeal. The mainstream media picks up these stories and broadcasts them to viewers without providing any context to them. While gun control activists assert that gun control is necessary, the American government should not ban guns because of the following reasons: potential vulnerability of innocent people being shot at by criminals and the inability for people to defend themselves against their own government.