With all the shootings that have happened in the last couple years you would think that more people would be for gun control but 52% are actually for gun rights or the right to own a firearm while 46% are for gun control. Gun rights allow legal US citizens to own a firearm and that right is protected by the 2nd amendment.
After the Newtown, Conn. school shooting many people in the US were gripped by fear and were asking for more control on guns. Stores that sold guns were taking them off of shelves, gun buybacks were set-up, more and more kids were wearing bulletproof backpack, and some kids even took their own guns to school for protection. And lawmakers said they would tighten gun laws. Gun violence dropped in 1990 but according to a study conducted by the University of Pennsylvania, 1994 gun laws had too many loopholes and had little to no effect on mass shootings. One reason gun control wouldn't work is because there are over 300 million people who privately own some type of gun. Now in theory more stricter gun laws could work. In 1996 Australia spent over $500
…show more content…
Because of this its almost virtually impossible to have a mass buyback of weapons like they did in Australia. In the wake of a mass gun crackdown gun sales went through the roof and over 100,000 people joined the National Rifle Association or the NRA as most people call it. And because of the 2nd Amendment which states “The right of the people to keep and bear arms may not be infringed” which means that Americans are supposed to be able to own guns without government intervention. This guarantees Americans the right to defend themselves, should the situation come up. Now in the past arming citizens was a safeguard to protect themselves from government tyranny or dictatorship. Some people see that the removal of guns would be the first step in removing their rights little by
It has been debated that if gun ownership is reduced, our crime rates will drop. However, countries such as Australia where their government completely isolated gun ownership, their crime rate skyrocketed like never before. According to personal finance website, Financial World, “There is a direct correlation between gun ownership rates and violent crimes” (The Financial World, “10 Arguments for and”). Considering both debatable sides, gun ownership is a right and cannot be taken away, however, limiting the usage or ownership of guns should be reinforced. Making stricter laws to purchase a gun should be an element that needs to more consider now that there is constant news of shootings across our country. It is very important to understand that the safety of our society comes first and we should not fear of going to a corner store to grab a cold soda; not fear of going to school to pick up your children and seeing ambulances and police cars surrounding the school; not fear of going to see the latest horror movie with some friends on a Friday night.
Imagine going to school where instead of worrying about a grade you got on a test, you have to worry about your school being the next victim of a mass shooting. 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” (United States Constitution), and yet instead of some people using their guns for self defense, they use it for mass shootings. Some argue that we already have gun control laws that don’t work, but others say if we had better gun laws than it would work. The debate on gun control started in November 22, 1963, when evidence in the assassination of president John F. Kennedy increased public awareness
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.
Gun control is defined as the “regulation of the selling, owning, and use of guns” (“Gun Control” Merriam-Webster 1). Gun control is a heated topic that many Americans concern themselves with today after recent mass shootings. Suggested solutions are posed and debated between different viewpoints. The laws in existence today should be carried out and tightened before excess laws are passed. Many Americans have turned to face the issue of gun control after recent mass shootings like the one in Las Vegas or in some Churches. Some Americans with a more liberal view believe that tighter gun control laws should be enacted. More conservative Americans believe that the gun control laws already passed should be followed through. The gun laws that have already been passed should be followed through opposed to enacting new laws because many laws are already in place, gun control laws do not stop illegally obtaining a gun, and strict gun control laws have failed to prevent mass killings in countries.
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
Gun control has been a long discussed and fiercely argued subject in the United States of America. Many believe it is a basic right to be permitted to own and carry a firearm as stated in the Second Amendment, which is oftentimes referred to as a quote from the amendment itself, 'the right to bear arms,' for the sake of simplicity. The other side posits that firearms are simply far too dangerous a tool for people to be allowed easy access to them.
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.
“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.
Guns will be used to kill at least 30,000 people this year in America alone, 30 people per day. Australia however, will not have nearly as many gun-related deaths because Australia has a ban on most firearms, and a gun buyback program. Because of this Australia hasn’t had a mass shooting since 1996. No one outside of law enforcement and military should be able to acquire firearms of any time, because with a limited access to guns, there will be a decrease in gun-related crimes and deaths.
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.
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
There are many controversial argument about whether to be for gun control or whether to be against gun control, I personally think that gun control should be even more strict then it is right now. The Federal Law prohibits certain groups of people to possess a firearm. Those people include illegal immigrants, convicted felons, and people that are diagnosed with certain types of mental diseases. President Obama announced that he is expanding the amount of background checks for gun buyers. Having gun control can lessen the amount of homicides and gun related deaths. There are many debates about gun control, but the main issue is carrying out and supporting the laws.
Of the many problems we face in gun control it is availability of guns to the very people that don’t need them. The Sandy Hook shooting, occurring on December 14, 2012, sparked a nation wide push for stricter gun control. The shooter, a mentally ill male, shot down 26 people with a semi-automatic AR-15-- a military type assault rifle. Many Americans were left wondering how a mentally ill person would be capable of acquiring such guns. The truth is that it is not very difficult for someone to acquire such weaponry. On January 14, 2013 Brian Walsh wrote in a Time article that there was nearly one gun for every person in the U.S. We own almost, if not, half of the world 's civilian guns. Furthermore our laws and regulations are generally slack compared to other developed countries. In Canada, not only do gun owners receive a background check, they must undergo a safety gun course and have a federal registration certificate for that weapon. Japan 's laws are among the strictest: essentially banning all weapons except those used in competitions and requiring
The United States has 88.8 guns per 100 people or about 270,000,000 guns, which is the highest total and per capita number in the world. This has resulted in a direct correlation between the number of guns owned and a number of deaths/mass shootings. When reviewing massacres, it is clear that America is an anomaly, this is because there has been more homicides and mass shootings in America than what there has been anywhere else in the world. There are two major problems with the US, and that is the Black Market and ease of accessibility someone has to purchase formidable weapons. Almost every state in the country does not require a permit to purchase or obtain a rifle, nor do you need a license or have the rifle registered. So, if we were to now make laws stricter and ban certain people from having guns, the mere possibility of ceasing all rifles that are already in the hands of Americans would be near impossible. It is clear that Terrorists and criminals are not deterred by laws or the government’s rulings, this does not mean they don’t pay attention to the laws, they just find other alternatives to carry out their motives. For example, terrorists stopped using bombs as laws were put in place which made it easier for the government to track purchases, however that didn’t stop them. It just meant they found another alternative, guns.
The other portion of people are against gun control. These citizens feel that their 2nd amendment is being violated, the more gun control there is. In the court case District of Columbia vs. Heller, the defendant complained that is right to bear arms was being violated. Heller applied for a one-year license for a handgun he wished to keep at home, but his application was denied. Heller sued the District of Columbia. He sought an injunction against the enforcement