Violence through the Hands or Mind? The USA has been experiencing multiple events of violence involving guns and the political fight to oppose further gun distribution, but is the gun really at fault?
The government of the United States has further shown that the fault in gun violence in placed within the gun itself rather than the individual who used it, the general public as well as politicians must realize that the fault rests within the person who has committed the crime. Through recent events such as Sandy Hook and the Aurora shootings, the focus on gun violence has reached an all-time high in the liberal agenda. What many liberals believe that gun control will limit the access of weapons to criminals actually proves to be a
…show more content…
Furthermore, the mental states of humans have often been left out of any legislative forums when it comes to guns. One of the details that politicians often miss when making gun laws is the mental background of some of the shooters in mass shooting incidents. The shooters in Aurora, Sandy Hook, Tucson, Virginia Tech and even Columbine all had similar traits, they possessed a form of mental disturbance that have been a factor for them committing such atrocities. However, their mental disabilities are of no excuse for their actions, anti-gun activists used this as a reason to make weapons extremely scarce to the general public. According to Charles W. Collier, a notable psychologist in criminal affairs, “In common law, a person is presumed to intend the natural and probable consequences of his voluntary actions.” (Collier 1) This states that through non-corrupted and common thought, anyone committing a crime is presenting a willingness to face the consequences of their actions. Notice how the tool of their crime is not stated or even mentioned as the source of fault? This further proves how the source of turmoil is the actor not the prop. In addition, guns need not be the sources of conflict for legislative acts, for many leftist and liberal supporters feel that gun legislation would prevent criminals from achieving weapons on their own account, this is folly. Little do some know
People who appreciate activities like shooting competitions and hunting, use firearms responsibly. This use contrasts with other uses, which often result in consequences that can be both intended and unintended. With past and present mass shootings, and acts of bloodshed perpetrated with the usage of weapons; has triggered a focus on gun control that once again has been brought into the spotlight. The purpose of the ongoing gun argument addresses the crimes that are committed with guns. This issue of gun control separated people into two groups: those who believe that carrying guns might prevent some crimes and fatalities, and those who don’t. There are individuals who believe absolutely the reverse: that more crime and deaths
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.
Laws regulating the use of guns in America have been a hot topic for years. Media coverage of mass shootings, acts of terrorism in and outside of the United States, and stories of families being murdered in the night has resulted in a desensitized, or perhaps, overly sensitized nation. People are scared and have centered their idea of safety on one of two main approaches: creating stricter gun laws so less crime occurs, or taking away gun restrictions so everyone can protect themselves against crime. Policies stemming from these vantage points begin by the agenda set by pertinent support and opposition groups, reflecting these approaches.
After the United States endures any firearm’s related tragedy an increase in gun control is always a very heated debate. Violent crimes committed with firearms have kept gun control in the spotlight for last several decades. Mass shootings at several educational institutions have led the way for an increase in gun control, most recently the shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut that left 20 children and six adults dead. Certain individuals see an increase of laws and regulations on guns as a “quick fix” to the situation; however, its apparent that these solutions have failed to get their job done. In the United States today violent crimes committed with firearm are increasing at an alarming rate; the increase
For this reason, it is incredibly hard for the country to agree or disagree on controversial topics such as gun control. Gun control laws and restrictions are methods in reducing the accessibility of firearms to the ordinary citizen. The belief is that with less dangerous firearms in the streets, the less crime there will be. Numerous studies and evidence show that a reduction of gun ownership can ironically increase the crime rate. This trend might seem counter intuitive but when seen at a different perspective, it becomes logical. When law abiding citizens are not able to purchase a weapon but a criminal is through illegal means such as the black market, it leaves people helpless against the gunman. Many advocates for gun control seem to ignore the facts and trends that show that gun ownership and crime rate does not have any correlation. Instead, these advocates seem to rely on the emotional appeal of people, exploiting the tragedies that are caused by shootings, wars, and criminal activities. The purpose of this essay is to educate people on the negative side effects of gun control and on how guns can actually decrease
In the United States of America the right to bear arms gave birth to a phenomenon called the “gun culture,” the term coined in 1970 by a historian Richard Hofstadter, which describes America’s heritage and affection for weapons(1). Not only did gun culture become an inseparable part of American democracy, but also it is considered to be synonymous with independence and freedom, the most important values for American society. Even though the crime rate and murder rate in the U.S. is higher than in any other developed country, U.S. citizens oppose every attempt made to pass gun control legislation(2). However, it may sound like a paradox, but the crime level in the most liberal states, when it comes to gun ownership, is the lowest in the
The debate over gun control is not a new argument, neither is the existence of mental illness. There have been those who support and those who oppose gun control for many years. What has recently re-ignited the debate is an increase in mass shootings over the past few decades; one in particular is the Newtown, Connecticut, massacre. Incidents, such as this, fuel anger and fear, driving many to question the need for firearms in modern society, while others cite these incidents as a reason for remaining armed. The purpose of gun control is to limit the amount of violence in today’s
Gun control has become an increasingly controversial topic in the nation due to the continuous debates relating to gun control and whether or not laws should be passed to make it harder for guns to be obtained. Guns serve for a variety of purposes that range from good to bad. Guns are not for everyone. Some individuals cannot handle guns properly, and some choose to use guns inappropriately. Lately, guns have become more of a problem in our society. There has been an increasing amount of shootings that have taken many lives and have wounded people emotionally, not just physically. Although guns are used for protection, firearms are reportedly used more in crimes. More and more shootings are breaking out across the nation. As a result, the
Mass shootings are increasing in the United States, and gun control advocates are seizing the opportunity to push anti-gun legislation to deter gun violence in America. Guns and the Second Amendment have come to the forefront of political rhetoric, leading to conflicting views between lawmakers on the future of gun legislation. Republican lawmakers are encouraging law abiding citizens to acquire firearms and to defend themselves against acts of violence by criminals. On the contrary, Democratic lawmakers believe the only way to slow gun violence in the United States is to remove guns from society. While certain politicians believe strict gun laws would protect the American people, the proposed policies would make our nation more vulnerable
While Americans were contemplating gun control proposals in the wake of mass shootings at a Colorado School, another gunman massacred 50 people in a club in Orlando. This incident brought heated political exchanges between President Obama and Trump, the Republican presidential candidate. It is estimated that in 2015 alone, there were more than 351 mass shootings in the United States. This is a worrying trend that should be reversed as soon as possible. Surprisingly, the trend has divided Americans into two groups. On one extreme end, there are those Americans who believe that the government should enforce gun control. On the other end, some Americans insist that stricter gun controls will not help in the fight against killings. In this light, this paper will try to provide a detailed analysis of the gun control debate while highlighting the various points made by the proponents and opponents of the gun control. The essay posits that gun control is counterproductive.
"Laws Controlling Private Gun Ownership Will Reduce Gun Violence." Gun Violence in America: Proposals for the Obama Administration. Washington, DC: Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, 2008. Rpt. in Gun Violence. Ed. Louise Gerdes. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2011. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 22 Mar. 2016.
Another article looks at the Tucson shooting where six individuals were killed as an example (Kaveny, 2016). While the author agrees that the constitution protects the rights of gun owners, she makes the argument that semiautomatic weapons were not what the founding fathers had in mind though and that these type of weapons should not be allowed to be owned by the public (Kaveny, 2016). The author also believes that it would be beneficial to have to obtain a license to own firearms and to purchase insurance for possible damages along with further funding for mental health patients to help keep these mass shootings from happening again (Kaveny, 2016).
Ten more people fall victim to another public shooter, and another gun control debate comes spiraling from the after math as laws against guns try to be placed. Is this really the best way to deal with the issue? No. The issue is people are killing people not guns are killing people. Society wants to ban guns because people are afraid when in actuality guns themselves are not the things that need to be banned. Even then do you have any proof the gun laws actually lower crime? Gun laws also go directly against the 2nd Amendment and it takes away one of the best means of self-defense from invaders and criminals. Therefore gun laws should not be put in place. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. We have a right to bear arms and is not something that can just be taken away.
There are different issues that have caught media headlines over the years. However, one subject that has attracted much focus is mass shootings. With the rise in cases of gun violence, the public has been engulfed in fear. These shootings have taken place in different areas (DeLateur and Fox 125). Examples include Aurora in Colorado and school shootings in Connecticut. According to Towers et al, these events have increased the need to comprehend the dynamics and causal factors. The main reason for this is the fact that compared to other developed economies, per capita level of such occurrences in addition to weapon-related deaths is greater. This paper provides an analysis of gun violence in America and raging debate around the subject. It will examine the extent of gun violence (statistics) and the reasons behind these heinous crimes. The effects of gun violence will also be analyzed. This paper will also analyze the debate that has surrounded the calls for gun control. In conclusion, the paper will provide steps that must be taken into consideration in order to prevent gun violence in America.
No issue has dominated America like gun violence. Since the start of 2017 there has been 384 mass shootings in America (Mass Shooting Tracker). These include the horrifying event in Las Vegas, where Stephen Paddock opened fire on a concert from his room at the Mandalay Bay. He ended up killing fifty nine people and injuring around four hundred and fifty people (Mass Shooting Tracker). It also includes the shooting in Sutherland Springs, Texas where a gunman entered a church and killed twenty seven people and injured another twenty. Reactions to these types of events are fairly similar. An outcry for background checks and even calls for a ban on all firearms usually follow after these events, and for good reason. The loss of life due to gun violence is becoming all too normal in the United States, but to ban all guns would be ineffective and unethical. This article will show that gun control has not worked in certain places of America and other parts of the world. The article will also describe why it is not a viable solution to ban all guns because it would infringe on the Second Amendment. In addition, the article will also present the opinion of those who think that a ban on all guns is a viable solution. This article will now show examples of gun control not working in the United States and other places of the world.