The Pros And Cons Of Gun Control

Today, we have discussed the current situation of gun ownerships in the U.S., and the tragedies associated with the abuse of guns. My proposal is to pass more gun control laws or policies to ensure a safer country. Consequently, one possible solution could be a background checking system which will effectively limit the opportunity for criminals to own guns. Nevertheless, until today, Americans have not reached consensus on gun control laws. At the end of my speech, I won’t urge you to sign on any “Gun Control Petitions”. But, maybe after today’s dinner, you would like to have a talk on gun control with your friends. And maybe you would like to think about the benefits you derive from the freedom of firearms, and also the losses you bear at

In the year 2016 alone, there have been 145 mass shootings around the United States, while there have been only 173 days in the years so far. In order to prevent these atrocities from occurring so frequently gun ownership should be regulated by both the federal and state governments through a background check for all sales of firearms. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System has prevented more than two million convicted felons and other prohibited purchasers from buying guns. The law also has a deterrent effect since the prohibited purchasers are less likely to try to buy guns when they know comprehensive background check requirements are in place. However, currently the federal law requires criminal background checks only for guns sold through licensed firearm dealers, which counts for only sixty percent of the total gun sales. The U.S. Congress needs to regulate the obtainment of guns with a background check for all sales of firearms in order to protect the lives of citizens in this country while not violating the Second Amendment and the rights of the state.

The movement has called for two changes to the current gun law: universal background checks for buyers and ban on the sale of assault-type firearms and large-capacity ammunitions (Szekely, 2018). The system of background checks is meant to ensure that all gun owners have the right capacity to handle firearms. Past incidences have shown that the system was ineffective because the state governments did not submit relevant information to the central database. For example, in one of the recent shooting incidences, the shooter had a known history of mental problems but had been able to purchase an assault rifle and high capacity ammunition. The changes in the background system would make it easier for gun dealers to identify people who are not qualified to own a gun. The restrictions on the sale of assault weapons and ammunition are crucial steps in reducing the number of deaths and injuries in case of a shooting incident. The shooter would not be able to inflict a lot of harm because of inefficiencies of the weapon at disposal.

Imagine this, there is a gazelle and a Cheetah, what would happen if you cut off the horns of the gazelle? Would the Cheetah not come and attack the gazelle because it’s “Too Easy”. No, it would just be easier for the Cheetah to get its prey/ gazelle. The innocent gazelle will get slaughtered by this ruthless Cheetah This is the same with the Gun Control issue. If you take away the guns what will you do to protect your family, when there is a ruthless killer similar to the fierce Cheetah? Guns may hurt others but as well can protect others. Guns are not even the problem sometimes it is the sharp everyday tools (scissors, knives, etc). So are guns really the problem, or is it the one behind the trigger the problem? The violence and racism in America are the main problems that lead the shootings. Is it the mental problems? The Medical? The Criminal? In this essay the proposition in store is for background checks, to see if the buyer has medical, mental or even criminal records shown, if so then the buyer won't be buying anything. Well this essay is here to show what proposition is best

Every day an average of 315 people is shot due to murders, assaults, suicides, police intervention and a bunch of different other ways. There has been an increase in gun violence with a 39 percent increase from 2015 this is highly due to the increase in gun control actions across America. People state that the Second Amendment gives them the right to bear arms, which is correct but we have entered muddy waters on this subject with recent cases. I propose that we have better background check and really dig deep into a person’s facts. As well as have better knowledge of mental health problems, before we let anyone bear a firearm that way we can prevent a gun from getting into the wrong hands.

In addition to more extensive mental health evaluations, general background checks should be implemented through every single purchase of a gun, rather than the one’s purchased through a Federal Firearms License. If the market for guns (including those purchased online or through a private seller) was mediated more effectively, the probability of somebody with malicious intentions getting caught prior to the act will be significantly increased. When somebody’s access to a gun is easier than their access to a vehicle, you know that there is a serious lack of security and concern for the welfare of this

Most recently, the main proposal to enact gun control is through the use of universal background checks. This paper will present arguments both for and against background checks and gun control in general, but will ultimately advocate for overall stricter gun control laws in the United

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 increasing rate of gun violence in the United States is reached an all time high. For years, America has seen one of the highest rates of shooting deaths among nations all around the globe. But it seems an old problem, which has only continue to grow in magnitude throughout the years, is reaching a critical limit. What should be done about gun violence? What is, or should be, the role of government in addressing it? I would argue that tougher background checks for any American who wants a gun—which includes Americans who want to enlisting in policing or armed services—are indispensible. Granted, while there are benefits to this approach, there are also limitations to what it remedies. Let’s consider these further, starting with the

Gun reform has been a hot and controversial topic on Capitol Hill lately, and stirs the passion of both gun owners and reformers. The escalation of gun violence in the U.S. has created a push for federal gun reform laws. In an editorial piece in the New York Times titled “The Latest Hurdle to Gun-Law Reform,” part of a continuing series on the epidemic of gun violence, the issues relating to getting gun reform laws passed are discussed. The editorial advances an affirmative case, the passing of a background-check bill.

In 2014 of the 42,820 suicides reported that year 21,386 involved a firearm (mel.org). Shootings on campus raise the question of whether properly trained students carrying firearms. The debate over gun control has two sides one is that people should have guns for many reasons like it is the second amendment and to protect themselves. The other side is that people shouldn't have guns because they can't be trusted with them.

In recent years, gun control has been one of the most debated topics in the United States. No matter who you ask, everyone always has an opinion on firearm ownership. After every publicized mass shooting, two groups of people form: group #1 wants to ban guns from private ownership in some shape or form, and group #2 fights against them fiercely to protect the constitutional right to bear arms. More specifically, the 2nd amendment to the U.S Constitution 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.” (US Const. amend. II).

What does the second amendment mean in the constitution? The second amendment is about Gun Control. What is Gun Control? Gun Control is your rights to own and use a gun. Guns are very dangerous and they are a serious issue. There are tons of accidental deaths caused by incorrect use of safety rules. What does the second amendment say about gun control in the constitution? The amendment states that “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”. But do we all agree on this amendment?

As we take a look at the way gun control advocates are planning on enforcing gun control, you may start to even question why we would even contemplate using such tedious means. The idea that limiting the size of a magazine or regulating the type of gun you can purchase or even doing something as simple as a background check will stop murders like the Connecticut shooting from happening is ridiculous. In Making Gun Control Happen the author, Patrick Radden Keefe, writes as an advocate to gun control. He indicates that one blatantly obvious change would be to “mandate a criminal background check for all gun purchases” as it would obviously stop criminals from getting their hands on a weapon (Keefe). It takes brains to live the life of a criminal; many of them most likely have weaseled their way out of the database and would