The Pros And Cons Of Gun Control

If gun control is regulated, then we will have less crime. Access to firearms makes killing easy, efficient, and impersonal, which increases the lethality of crime. Josh Sugarmann, the Executive Director of the Violence Policy Center has once said, "We recoil in horror and search for explanations, but we never face up to the obvious preventive measure: a ban on the handy killing machines that make crimes so easy.”Allowing untrained people to carry guns puts others at risk and it can result in self-inflicting injuries both by suicide and unintentional incidents. Gun violence in America kills more than 30,000 and injures almost 70,000 each year. Guns can be misused and abused, which is why gun

The majority of anti-gun advocates voice their opinion that more guns would produce more crimes unfortunately for them there is little to no truth in that claim. In reality, when gun ownership increased the amount of murders diminished as well. When states passed concealed weapons laws there was significant drops in the number of multiple victim shootings occurring, the number of deaths, and the number of injuries at these shootings. In 1997 both Wales and England banned handguns and the instantaneous effect was a 50% increase according to crime research. They never saw a day lower than after the year they decided to ban handguns. It has been proven by many surveys that the banning of guns increases crime rate which in turn proves that gun control is not the answer.

Next, it is important to ask who are the people that really kill? Is it the gun or the person? People who defend the right to bear arms often state that it is not the gun that kills it is the individual that kills. Some feel the answer lies in that we need to introduce stricter laws on who is able to apply for license to carry guns. Gun laws vary from state to state with California being the most restrictive state to Arizona with the most lenient laws. These laws include background checks, waiting periods, and registration requirements to who can purchase and sells guns. Even with these laws in place we have still witnessed an increase in the number of mass shootings over the past few years. Implementing stricter gun control laws will ultimately not eliminate individuals from acquiring access to guns if they truly desire. State governments may require licenses to purchase guns but there remains an underground and online market to purchase guns, which does not monitor whether a person truly has a license or not. Rather than focusing on implementing stricter laws for control and ways to make the purchase

Those supporting firearm control contend that in the event that we confine weapons then murder and wrongdoing rates will drop. Be that as it may, until we tackle the disdain on the planet there will dependably be wrongdoing and murdering. Hoodlums will discover different weapons or figure out how to get firearms wrongfully. Contemplates demonstrate that in ranges with more weapon laws, wrongdoing is higher. Until we can begin getting serious about the individuals who perpetrate violations, firearm laws can do nothing to offer assistance. It is not the weapon that executes, but rather the individual pulling the trigger. Samuel Jackson said, “I don’t think it’s about more gun control, I grew up in the south with guns everywhere and we never shot anyone. This [shooting] is about people who aren’t taught the value of life.”

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

Guns are major part of living in the United States of America. The U.S alone has 35% to 50% of the world's civilian owned Firearms. More than likely you have at least one in your house. As more and more guns are being produced and sold in the U.S more anti-gun activists are pushing for increased gun control but the facts show that more gun control actually means more gun related violence. There is no doubt that there is a problem with gun related violence in the U.S. but there is a perception that it has suddenly worsened but in all reality things are better that they have been in decades. Once again on the news you will hear that 30,000 people killed last year with guns. What the media does not say is that of those 30,000, 20,000 of those people killed themselves with a gun. Some of these facts are shocking to hear. Even though gun control is the first thing we turn to when gun related violence occurs the negative factors are far greater than the positives.

According to US News, "We Need Gun Control to Stop More Than Criminals” by Susan Milligan, criminals don't allow the laws, so guns control don't stop them from crime, but there are have a tragedy about guns. In New Mexico, a twelve year old boy shot two classmates. Just because his family has gun, so he got the gun easily. If his family have not gun, tragedy would not have happened. The second gun tragedy is about a retired policeman shoot a men who was texting during a movie time in Movie Theater. If he could not bring a gun into the theater, the tragedy would not have happened. An experienced killer shot two people at the grocery store. If he had a strict background survey before he bought the gun, it wouldn't have happened. Gun control can stop a lot of murders.

Most homicides in the United States are committed with firearms. Approximately 270 firearms are owned by Americans scales to about 90 guns for every 100 people. Annually, the misuse of these firearms cost thousands of lives. Stricter gun control is a step into putting a halt to mass shootings. Not only should gun control keep being enacted, but the process to obtaining a gun should be stricter because it would be an immense effort to keep gun violence down and effectively save more lives.

The second 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.” taking away our second amendment takes away our protection that was given to the people in the original rights of the constitution. Gun control has been a topic of controversy since the New Deal in which the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Federal Firearms Act of 1938 were enacted. Although some forms of gun control are useful such as background checks and the National Firearms act of 1938, people should not be limited by concealed carry permits or open carry laws. American citizens should not be restricted from the type of firearm they are allowed to buy, how they use them, or where they keep them unless it is unconstitutional.

However, having minimal gun laws proved to be the best plan of action. While having an uncontrollable amount of guns could be detrimental to a country’s survival, it is also apparent that when citizens have guns or other forms of protection during a mass shooting, there are less casualties. This gives a compromise between strict gun control laws and no gun control laws. Since microstamping and background checks limit the majority of gun related incidents, it lets the citizens keep guns but with helping limit gun related homicides. By giving this compromise, citizens on both sides of the argument would be contempt. More research would need to be done to come up with a complete solution to gun control. Many countries are starting to implement gun control into their societies and some are not putting any gun control in place. As these countries develop it becomes normal to either not have guns or to have guns at all times. Murder and crime rates will be easy to compare at this time especially if areas record their crime the same way. This issue needs to be discussed with the main issue of saving lives instead of just taking pride in a political party. Many people on both sides of the issue just listen to what their side has to say and leaves out other information presented by the other side. This results in a biased mindset and people become less knowledgeable on the issue. With further research and study, mass shootings will become preventable and crime rates will

Every year thousands of people die by gunfire. Thousands of families lose loved-ones because of senseless crimes in which guns are used. Many political figures and innocent civilians debate the issue of gun-control.The current gun laws range from being able to purchase and keep a gun with no provisions, or with provisions. (NRA-ILA) People on the pro gun regulation side argue that less guns means less gun violence. While people on the no gun regulation side argue that guns do not kill people, people kill people. Both are fair arguments. But, without question, The United States Federal Government should enact stricter gun laws because of the gun-related suicides, the evidence of a decrease in gun violence when laws are put into place, and the fact that guns are rarely used for self-defense.

Lastly, a major component to the right to bear arms comes from the interpretation of the Second Amendment to represent an individual’s rights to bear arms not only for individual protection but also for the protection of tyranny from a government. Previously in the United States the idea that the Second Amendment was meant to protect this right, was only one that shared by fringe individuals however, in recent years this has become a more legitimate argument. It appears that on a daily basis the government may be corrupt and many American citizens doubt if they can trust the government at all. David Welna, of National Public Radio wrote an article referencing the idea that tyranny is now a mainstream idea. He explains that in the aftermath

Almost daily, there is a story on the news about gun violence and the discussion comes up about gun control. What is gun control? As defined by Marriam-Webster, gun control is the “regulation of the selling, owning, and use of guns,” (Marriam, 2017). When is there too much control? How does it affect the law-abiding citizen? These are questions that need to be taken into consideration while taking a position, as gun control effects everyone in the United States of America. Gun control needs to cease due to the fact that it takes away from the rights and protection of the American people whilst increasing government control.

Gun control has been one of the most controversial topic in the society. Some people support gun control because they think it will help reduce homicide. However, gun control won’t help reduce homicide, and it will have negative economic effect. In addition, people can be safer when there is no gun control.

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.