The Pros And Cons Of Gun Control

The studies and research on gun control has opened up many ideas on how weak the current laws really are. Crime rates consist of high numbers. “Since 1982, there have been at least 62 mass shootings across the country, with the killings unfolding in 30 states from Massachusetts to Hawaii”

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

Current Gun Control regulations do not deter violence and crime. It has been shown that places that have relaxed their gun control laws have a higher crime and death rate. Data proves that homicide rates “[...] among the metro areas whose principal city is in a state that requires some form of permit to purchase a gun, is 4.32 per 100,000 residents, compared with 5.74 among cities in no-permit states”(Bailey). This is evidence that there is a correlation between gun control and death rates. It is also proven with statistical evidence that places with the least amount of gun control have the most violence. Statistics show that “‘none of the states with the most gun violence require permits to purchase rifles, shotguns, or handguns. Gun owners are also not required to register

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.

One of the main topics of debate is whether or not gun laws actually correspond with lower murder rates. “The average annual gun death rate ranged from almost 3 per 100,000 in Hawaii to 18 per 100,000 in Louisiana. Hawaii had 16 gun laws, and along with New Jersey, New York and Massachusetts was among states with the most laws and fewest deaths. States with the fewest laws and most deaths included Alaska, Kentucky, Louisiana and Oklahoma.” (CBSnews.com). These statistics can lead one to believe that more gun laws equate to lower death rates. What these numbers prove is that some gun regulations help lower death rates. However, what gun control activists would have you believe that a full on gun ban would lower these numbers more. This is not the case as evident in the following, “During the years in which the D.C. handgun ban and trigger lock law was in effect, the Washington, D.C. murder rate averaged 73% higher than it was at the outset of the law, while the U.S. murder rate averaged 11% lower” (James D.

Too many people have lost their lives due to careless accidents and violent acts of crime that could have possibly both been avoided with more control. According to a Lancet study implementing federal universal background checks could reduce firearm deaths by a projected 56.9%; background checks for ammunition purchases could reduce deaths by a projected 80.7%; and gun identification requirements could reduce deaths by a projected 82.5%.(pro) Research shows that more gun control law being implemented could saves thousands of lives each and every year.

Developing stricter gun laws in the United States can lower the amount of crime that is committed using firearms, as well as to prevent accidental death, homicides and suicides. Gun control is effective, and many nations have the statistics to prove that. Firearms have a place in society, but it is not in the name of self-protection. The source is somewhat incorrect, as gun control is necessary, but it does not mean that all firearms should be eliminated.

Researchers at the University of Alabama have conducted studies trying to find links between guns and mass shootings (Michaels). There are hundreds of millions of guns in circulation in America today. In fact, “the total number of guns in circulation is at least 240 million” (Ballaro and Finley). Adam Lankford, an associate professor of criminal justice at the University of Alabama, suggests that “America’s high rate of public mass shootings is connected with the number of guns circulating in the country” (Michaels). Implementing stricter gun laws would cause fewer people to want to purchase guns, resulting in fewer guns in circulation in the coming years. In the United States, “around 30,000 people die from gun fire each year. Around half of these are murders, a little less than half are suicides, and the rest are lethal accidents” (Ballaro and Finley). (2) Currently there are several million guns in circulation, and gun deaths in America are higher than any other developed country. (5) If the trend continues, the number of gun deaths will continue to increase. As stated in the article “10 Pro-Gun Myths, Shot Down.” author Dave Gilson states that “People with access to more guns tend to kill more people- with guns. States with higher gun ownership rates have higher gun murder rates- as much as 114% higher than states with lower gun ownership rates” (Gilson). (7) More

There are currently over 200 million guns in use, which means obtaining a gun in the United States mustn't be that hard. If gun usage could be regulated more by banning certain unneeded weapons to the public and requiring a more in depth background check, than miss usage of guns, and deaths caused by them would decrease. However, already existing laws need to be enforced and harsher penalties for those who don't follow the laws. If the country would agree on certain legislation for gun control, than The United States could be a much safer

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

Although the laws of gun control are more and more strict, the rate of gun violence and gun crime in the United State are not going down. Many people think gun control is not the answer for gun violence. For example, the tragedy at Virginia Tech may tell us something about how a young man could be driven to commit terrible actions, but it does not teach us very much about gun control. So

Some say that more gun control laws would reduce gun deaths. The website, procon.org, Should More Gun Control Laws Be Enacted, February 26, 2016, says, “There were 464,033 total gun deaths between 1999 and 2013” (p 6). Of these deaths, 58.2% were suicide, 37.7% were homicides, and 2.2% were unintentional. Guns are the leading cause of death by homicide with 66.6% and by suicide with 52.2%, and are the 12th leading cause of all deaths. The study published by American Journal of Public Health found that "legal purchase of a handgun appears to be associated with a long-lasting increased risk of violent death" (p 6). Guns are related to a lot of deaths, and are among the top weapons associated with all deaths. Also, just legally owning one increases a person’s risk of dying

Gun control activists have a tendency to use the mantra that more guns means more deaths. Gun control activists will also point out to the U.S. murder rate and compare it to England’s as further proof. However, the mantra that more guns means more death has been proven to be patently false when compared to multiple European countries, where there is no direct correlation between gun ownership and murder rate (Kates & Mauser, n.d., p652). Furthermore, Kates & Mauser (n.d., p653) went on to show that there is actually a negative correlation between firearm concentration and violent crimes. Ehrenfreund & Godlfarb (2015) referenced a study conducted in 2011 by an economist named Richard Florida, using a graphic he made created showing states with tighter gun laws had fewer gun related deaths per capita. This has also been refuted by the research of Kates & Mauser where it was

The United States should pass stricter gun laws to reduce homicides and suicides. For example, in the article “Briefing: Armed and Dangerous,”

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.