Why Is Gun Control So Unique?

Many tragedies have occurred recently that have spurred the debate on whether or not we need tighter gun controls. On one side of the debate are the gun control supporters, who claim that the easy access to guns is the primary cause for high rates of crime plaguing the United States. On the other side are people who argue that gun laws will not prevent criminals from obtaining guns, since they will continue to get them illegally. Guns are used for protection when in the hands of people who obey the law. It is crucial to not hinder law-abiding citizen’s ability to possess firearms with stricter gun laws, since gun laws do not lower crime, and guns can keep people safe.

“Legal restraints on the lawful purchase of guns will have little effect on the legal use of guns” (pg.125). Author James Q. Wilson, a professor of management and public policy at the University of California in Los Angeles writes the article “Just Take Away Their Guns” to provide the American public with evidence of why taking away their guns will have little effect on crime in the United States. “Just Take Away Their Guns” was published into the New York Times Magazine in March, 1994. Professor Wilson, author of many books such as “Thinking about Crime,” “Bureaucracy,” “The Moral Sense,” and “Moral Judgment” uses statistics to advocate for perspective on gun control. The article not only addresses the use of guns but also provides a lot of textual evidence to support the author’s claims related to legal restraints on lawful purchases of guns. Firearms present in the homes of American citizens, while potentially dangerous, provide these citizens with a sense of security.

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

Eighty-nine people depart from this earth due to gun violence in the US every day. From school children, to victims of domestic violence, to people going about their daily lives, this status quo is unacceptable. On Tuesday January 5th, 2016 President Obama announced that he would send proposals on reducing gun violence in America to Congress. His spokesman, Jay Carney, mentioned that this is “a complex problem that will require a complex solution.” The ability to own a gun is considered by some a birthright of Americans. However, with crime rates involving handguns rising each day it has become quite clear. Handgun laws must become stricter in order to reduce homicide and crime. The question is, “which solution in most effective in decreasing gun violence?” Gun control is a major conflict that is constantly reoccurring and the US is seemingly divided over it.

What cause crime? Is is an individual’s access to firearms or is it their willingness to act illegally given the opportunity? In this argumentative essay I will be discussing one of the most debated topics in the United States today, gun control. There are two extremely opposite views on this topic: the belief that guns enable crime, and the belief that guns deter crime. These polar opposites leave room for a very good discussion of what facts and truths may lie behind this topic. Throughout this essay I will be analyzing both sides of this issue.The significance of a topic such as gun control is very prevalent in today’s society. Some see it sad that we must argue over one of our supposedly deemed unalienable rights such as bearing a firearm.

A majority of the American people feel that gun control laws will help reduce crime rates because the waiting period would allow time for a person’s temper to cool down. They also feel that gun control will prevent repeat offenders because when a person tries to purchase a handgun, he will have to fill out a lengthy questionnaire. The questionnaire will include questions about the buyer’s past, for example, if they have a criminal record or a record of any mental illness. If there is a criminal record in that person’s history, he will not be able to make the purchase. Restricting handgun ownership would also reduce crime, because guns are used most often in robberies and murders (Mayer 28). They are very easily concealed under a coat, or even in the waistband of pants.

Gun control is a very divisive subject in our country today. It is so divisive because some people really think they should be able to own their personal guns. However some people disagree with this. Over the last couple of years gun violence has been increasing dramatically. The United States leads the world for most mass shootings from 1966 to 2012 with 90 shootings.

For many years now, citizens of the United States of America have questioned if restricting the right for Law abiding Americans to own guns will decrease crime, murder, and violence, benefiting the county as a whole. However, there are many logical, and factual reasons as to why doing so may not be beneficial to the people of the great, free nation at all. Guns are a huge part of this extravagant nations creation and history, as without firearms, America may not have ever gained its independence from Great Britain. Violence is at a high in the United States, with and without the use of firearms, and Washington’s politicians are only striving on

Gun control is broken down and analyzed. The topic is generally discussed, talking about the concept of gun control laws and differences in these laws by state. The argument in favor of the topic is assessed from multiple different angles, and facts and sources are used to explain the general opinion of those that support gun control. Next, the other side is considered, with persuasive evidence and logic to prove the viewpoint that gun control is negative and harmful to the country. Aspects of the debate, such as conceal-carry permits and gun-free zones are discussed, and examples of crime stopped by citizens that possess a firearm are used to reinforce the main idea. Lastly, the article ends by considering other actions that could be

Some countries with assault rates similar to America 's but with lower gun restriction and with a lower percentage of homicide committed with guns enjoy homicide rates 50% lower than America. Gun assaults are 5-7 times more likely to result in death than non-gun assaults and from the fact that 70% of American homicides are committed with guns (Cornell University Law School, 2006). Many people have different views why they feel that strict gun laws can help their country, such as those that believe gun control laws are effective in reducing gun-related accidents and crime and should be enforced by the government. Those that believe gun control laws are ineffective in reducing gun-related accidents and crime and thus support fewer gun control measures. Also many believe that the private ownership of guns can also help to reduce crime.

Throughout American history, gun control legislation has not always existed. In today’s day and age with the start of technologies and processes, it is easy to produce guns, and that’s why gun control restrictions have been ratified. It is important to understand the reason behind America's view towards guns because it helps you better comprehend the arguments on either side you look at it. Since the first real gun control act in the 1930's, up to today, efforts to ban assault weapons throughout America and gaining knowledge about America's intricate relationship with guns will help the understanding purpose of this essay. How guns correspond and cause an affect with the crime rate can have different predetermined notions. This concept could go one of two ways that banning guns would drastically decrease crime, or on the other hand, if everyone was armed, it would equally decrease crime. The hard part is determining which of these methods would work the best, and once we figure that out, we will have a better understanding of the question “Do Guns Make Society Safer or More Violent?”

Today, gun control is one of the most commonly debated social issue amongst Americans. Generally people believe the enforcement of stricter firearm regulations would help reduce the crime rates of America. Although firearm laws are supported, based on the ideal of building a safer nation by limiting it 's civilian 's access to firearms, these laws do very little when addressing the main issue with firearms. Stricter firearm regulations should not be imposed on law abiding citizens, who are mentality capable of handling and operating a firearm for self-defense. The main issue with firearms is the easy access criminals and mentally unstable people have to these deadly weapons.

In American History Gun control legislation has not always existed. In today’s day and age with the start of technologies and processes, it is easy to produce guns, and that’s why gun control restrictions have been ratified. It is important to understand the reasons behind America's view towards guns because it is helps you better comprehend the arguments on either side of the argument. Since the first real gun control act in the 1930's to up to today efforts to prohibition assault weapons throughout America, gaining knowledge about America's intricate relationship with will help with the understanding purpose of this essay. How guns correspond and cause affect with the crime rate can have different predetermined notions. This concept could go one of two ways that banning guns would drastically decrease crime, or on the other hand if everyone was armed, it would equally decrease crime. The hard part is determining which of these methods would work the best, and once we figure that out we will have a better understanding of the question. “Do Guns Make Society Safer or More Violent?”

After the tragedy of Sandy Hook elementary the topic of gun control has been on the rise. However, for a handful of other nations, gun control is a topic of the past. In that respect, why is it just now becoming a sincere issue for the United States and how should it be addressed? Some argue that guns are not the issue using claims such as “guns do not kill people, people kill people,” which holds merit. However, others argue that although guns do not kill people, we should not make it easier for people to kill people. In this paper, I will be specifically addressing gun control of handguns. Although some tragedies are caused by rifles with adaptations, such as the Vegas shooting, these cases are few and far between and should be treated thusly. This is because handguns are the soul perpetrator of crimes that involve guns. Guns pose a real danger to society. Specifically, because they are a means to injure, kill, or intimidate another person. Though this can be argued through the side of self-defense as well, firearms should not be legal because; people use firearms as a means escape economic struggle, evidence shows that countries with strict gun laws have less homicides, and the practical uses of fire arms.

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.