The Pros And Cons Of Gun Control Laws

In the current year, many things have changed in the political world with some of them being welcomed by all and others not as much. While this paper is not specifically about the people holding political offices, I feel as though it is important to view their influence in these issues. The policy that I am going to discuss in this paper is gun control as I feel it is a hotly debated issue in the country today, especially after the incidents we have had throughout the recent years.

The article “Gun Control Laws: Should the United States adopt stronger gun control laws?” focuses on the debate on passing stricter gun control laws. For example, supporters believe that gun control laws will decrease mass shootings and gun violence. Additionally, adopting these laws does not violate the Second Amendment, and as a result it does not limit the government from the use of fire arms when it is necessary. However, opponents argue that the gun control laws will not stop gun violence. The problem is the people holding the gun and not the gun itself. Furthermore, opponents gathered that stronger gun control laws do violate the Second Amendment. The author illustrates the debate on whether the United States should or should not adopt stronger gun control laws.

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

What gun control laws are going to help stop mass shootings? Even if the government banned the sale of assault rifles and guns in general,people with bad intentions are going to purchase them illegally. In the three recent mass shooting that caused many deaths, the shooters got their guns illegally with no trace of the sale on these weapons. Sandy Hook,Columbine,and San Bernardino were all mass shootings where the shooters got their guns illegally, stole the gun from family members or other people, and caused a lot of danger and harm to people. There would be no regulations to stop them because even if there were stricter gun laws, they still would be able to purchase their guns illegally.Stricter gun laws will not prevent crime,people will still get illegal firearms,and no sales to the public will reduce revenue.

Should gun control laws be changed? Well, first, gun control is entirely based off the notion that people are committing gun related crimes because they have access to them and these debates are whether or not the nation should ban guns entirely. This whole rebel of gun control change is said to help reduce violent crimes (Swickard). This is a well-known debate in today’s world. Many are involved in protests all around the world, while their schools are getting shot up and are asking for changes to make gun control laws stricter. However, the fact is, guns are not the problem in this world, it is the individual. If you put a gun in a criminal’s hand, they could do whatever they wish. Gun control laws should not be changed because current laws

“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.

As opponents against gun control have numerous reasons as to why guns should not be restricted amongst the American public but pointed to the Second Amendment to the United Constitution as the main reason why gun control should not be permitted in the U.S. However, what these critics do not want to accept is that since 1980, several crucial events in the United States have led to excessive gun control movement. Remarkably, it takes a lot more than one appalling catastrophe to influence Americans that more attention should be taken into monitoring the number and types of guns the public can get access to. However, some major shooting calamities in the U.S such as assassination attempts on President Reagan’s, Columbine, Virginia Tech, and Sandy Hook have all triggered majority of Americans to take a stance in favor of gun control legislation. The first key push in the direction of the gun control movement begun during the era of Ronald Reagan presidency since he happened to be of one of the most “pro gun” presidents in American history.

Gun control laws should be strictly enforced because individuals can take advantage of the relaxed enforcement and harm others.

Following the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, lawmakers have begun reconsidering the gun laws that are currently in place. Many states have previously implemented “red flag laws” (Johnson 2). However, after the recent events, lawmakers are debating on whether or not those laws are enough. Of course, to most people, stronger gun control laws seems like an obvious decision, but it is not that easy. Gun control laws are complicated. It is a “balancing act in the United States between public safety and the right to bear arms” (Mueller 2). Lawmakers must carefully balance the safety and constitutional rights of citizens. This is difficult to do when everyone has different values and points of view.

Here we go again. Another argument on gun laws and why they should or shouldn't be made stricter in the US. The two sides of this argument have been going back and forth since the tragic shooting on February 14th, 2018 at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland Florida. This school shooting has triggered a massive disagreement on the two sides and people are not giving up on their opinions. Some people believe gun laws are just fine as they are, while others think gun laws should be stricter, like myself. Both sides of this argument have reasonable, valid points and it’s up tp the reader and their opinion to decide which side to take.

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.

Gun deaths are the twelfth most cause of all deaths in America or 1.3% of all deaths "Gun Control - ProCon.org". Unintentional deaths caused by guns is 0.5% of deaths in America and it's decreasing every year. Homicide rates with guns have been decreasing since 2006 with 41% and now in 2015 with 35% "Gun Control - ProCon.org". Why ban guns? Guns should not be banned. The research shows that gun deaths like homicide, unintentional deaths, and undermined deaths are going down. If you do the research you can find that there was a ban it was from 1999-2004 and didn't go as planned. After you read this you will see why you should say keep them.

In this paper I discuss why gun control laws are working. I am in favor of very strict gun control and removal of guns from the hands of criminals. I n the paper, I discuss some of the most objectionable practices:

Since 1791, the United States has allowed citizens the right to bear arms; citizens have depended on the ability to carry and use firearms. What if that just, went away? Every citizen would give up their firearm and there would be nothing for civilians to use to protect themselves with, at least, not something that they are used to carrying or having in their homes. The government should not restrain the ownership, the use, or the concealed carry of firearms for the reason that owning guns has shown to lower crime rates; keeping guns prevents the Second Amendment from being violated; and banning guns does not prevent criminals from disobeying the law.

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.