Since the inception of the Brady Act, over 118 million applications for firearm transfers or permits were subject to background checks. About 2.1 million applications, or 1.8%, were denied.
When it comes to gun control, there are several disagreements. While some believe that guns should be extremely regulated or even banned, others maintain that guns are essential and should not be as heavily regulated. Despite objections, gun regulation is good as is.
Some people believe that guns should be heavily regulated. In fact, According to Handgun Control ¨laws such as the Brady Act, which requires background checks on gun buyers, have prevented four hundred thousand felons and other prohibited purchasers from buying handguns.” These laws have done their job. This system still has its flaws. They are trying to fix a system that is not broken and usually when someone tries to fix something that is not broken they break it. Also, when there are new laws for gun
…show more content…
Joseph Sobran argues that, “there are solid constitutional arguments against gun control. For one thing, nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government granted the right to limit an individual's right to own firearms”. He states that the government has no right to limit guns. Even though he has a point there is a limit to that statement such as serious criminals and mentally unstable people. Likewise Sharon Harris states that guns protect people against criminals, “the right to bear arms protects the individual from violent aggressors and from the ineffective protection state and federal government is offering its citizens … criminals benefit from gun control laws that make it more difficult for ordinary citizens to protect themselves.” She believes that guns keep people safe and that regulating guns will only benefit criminals. This is not true because regulations help prevent criminals from getting guns. Having less regulations is a dangerous
Right now, the U.S. has a National Instant Background Check System; however, it contains many flaws. This system is meant to act as a filter to stop the wrong people from having guns. In 2007, the Bipartisan legislation was passed to strengthen this system. It relies on data supplied by the states, but the data is often incomplete and inadequate (Merino 104). Unlicensed gun sellers have also created a dangerous loophole. The law makes an exception for gun sellers who aren’t federally licensed gun dealers. These sellers sell guns informally through venues such as gun shows, and are not required to run background checks. This is a dangerous loophole where people who should not have guns can get them (“Gun”). Senator Frank R. Lautenberg once stated, commenting on the gun sh...
As a result of several recent mass shootings, gun control has become a popular topic. Gun control refers to the laws, background checks, and more protections against mentally ill individuals purchasing firearms. Some of the population believes that gun control should be strengthened, while the others are against it. There have been many situations in which firearms were used to harm innocent people, but gun control is not the solution to the problem we face as a nation.
In America guns have been a part of the country’s society since it’s birth. Throughout history the citizens of the US have used firearms to protect the nation, protect their families, hunt for food and engage in sporting activities. The issue of Guns and gun control is complex. Weighing the rights and liberties of the individual against the welfare and safety of the public has always been a precarious balancing act. In the United States, gun control is one of these tumultuous issues that has both sides firmly entrenched in their positions. Those parties in favor of gun ownership and the freedom to use and keep arms, rely on the fact that the provision for such rights is enshrined in their constitution. In this climate of growing violence, rife with turmoil and crime, gun advocates feel more than ever that their position is justified. As citizens of the “Land of the Free” possessing a gun is a fundamental right, and may even be a necessity... Anti- gun lobbyists point to the same growing violence and gun related crimes in an effort to call on the government to take action. By enacting more laws and stricter control, these people not in favor of guns feel society would be better safer.
Gun Laws need to be regulated for multiple reasons. For one thing multiple sources including the United States Center for Disease Control and Prevention have listed the United States as having the highest rate of firearm violence among industrialized nations and being the leader in per-capita gun deaths among industrialized nations. The CDC about one hundred thousand americans are victims of gun violence and thirty thousand people die from gun related wounds every year. As If those 4 stats weren’t enough to justify guns being regulated, we still have to worry about things like gun shows which use loopholes in our current laws to sell guns to mentally ill people or former felons which are then used to help contribute to the multiple school shootings that we’ve seen over the years and other gun related crimes.
history with a right to bear arms. Finally one can see the conflict of views
In "Just Take Away Their Guns," author James Q. Wilson argues that "Legal restraints on the lawful purchase of guns will have little effect on the illegal use of guns" (Wilson 63). Wilson points out that it would be tough to remove all legally purchased guns from the streets and nearly impossible to confiscate illegally purchased guns. Gun advocate J. Warren Cassidy argues that "The American people have a right 'to keep and bear arms'. This right is protected by the Second Amendment to the Constitution. . ." in an article titled "The Case for Firearms" (Cassidy 275). James B. Jacobs and Kimberly A. Potter wrote in an article called "Keeping guns out of the "wrong" hands: the Brady law and limits of regulations" that "US law enforcement should concentrate on stiff sentences for crimes committed with guns and recognize that gun control laws do not keep guns from the wrong people" (Jacobs and Potter 1 of 27). Daniel B. Polsby, author of "The false promise: gun control and crime," simply states, "Gun control laws don't work" (Polsby 1 of 11). Polsby feels that "gun control laws are ineffective because [they] have not been proven to be a deterrent to crime" (1 of 11). James D. Wright states, in his article "Second Thoughts about Gun Control," that "If there were fewer guns around, there would also be less crime and less violence" (Wright 93). More gun control laws will only make it a hassle for law abiding citizens to purchase guns. They will not keep guns out of the criminal's hands because they have other methods of obtaining guns, such as the secondary market which is the illegal sale of firearms. Another reason why more gun control legislation will backfire is that those who want to purchase guns to protect themselves a...
Americans are faced with a huge problem of violence in the streets, these streets have become a place where old people are beaten for their social security checks, where little women are attacked and raped, where teen aged thugs shoot it out for some turf to sell their illegal drugs, and finally where small children everyday are caught in the way of bullets during drive by shootings. We try to ignore the criminals in our society and how they hurt it, but we shouldn’t. We should take actions to stop these acts of crazy people. And people try, but the hard work of some misguided individuals to stop the legal ownership of guns doesn’t really affect the problem at all, and takes the guns from the innocent citizens, who simply want means of self defense.
Hence, gun control is a frequently discussed controversial topic in American politics. Although the Second Amendment prevents the federal government from completely banning guns in America, limited restrictions are allowed on the distribution and possession of firearms. Certain groups of people such as criminals, the mentally unstable, and soldiers dishonorably discharged from the military are prohibited from possessing or interacting with firearms (Flynn). These restrictions are enforced by background checks in some states, on both a state and federal level. However, gun laws vary from state to state and are often not thorough enough; the background checks are flawed due to lack of information and misinformation, and guns can easily end up in the hands of criminals and malevolent individuals.
Ultimately, it is a person’s choice to use firearms to commit violent crimes. So criminals should be controlled, not the guns which they share with millions of law-abiding citizens. Gun control supporters claim that gun control lowers crime rate. We as people need to take a stand and fight for our Second Amendment and the right to bear arms. Gun control advocates need to realize that passing laws that honest gun owners will not obey is a self-defeating strategy. Gun owners are not about to surrender their liberties or their right to bear arms. The Federal Govement of the United States should not be able to take away the right of law-abiding citizens to own a gun.
Throughout the years there has been an ongoing debate over the Second Amendment and how it should be interpreted. The issue that is being debated is whether our government has the right to regulate guns. The answer of who has which rights lies within how one interprets the Second Amendment. With this being the case, one must also think about what circumstances the Framers were under when this Amendment was written. There are two major sides to this debate, one being the collective side, which feels that the right was given for collective purposes only. This side is in favor of having stricter gun control laws, as they feel that by having stricter laws the number of crimes that are being committed with guns will be reduced and thus save lives. However while gun control laws may decrease criminals’ access to guns, the same laws restricts gun owning citizens who abide by the law; these citizens make up a great majority of the opposing side of this argument. These people argue that the law was made with the individual citizens in mind. This group believes that the Amendment should be interpreted to guarantee citizens free access to firearms. One major group that is in strong opposition of stricter gun control laws is the National Rifle Association (NRA). The NRA argues that having stricter gun control laws will only hinder law-abiding citizens. The final outcome on this debate will mainly depend on how this Amendment is going to be interpreted.
“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.” The right of all Americans to bear arms is a right the Founding Fathers held to equal importance as the Constitution itself. Gun control laws directly violate this right and therefore should not even be under consideration. Even if that issue is overlooked, gun control advocates state that in order to reduce firearm related violence, gun control laws must be implemented to remove the violence caused by firearms. Although this may seem reasonable, the consequences of such laws are ironically counterproductive; they exacerbate the problem instead of fixing it. Besides the fact that the American Constitution guarantees its citizens the right to bear arms, the idea of restricting gun ownership in order to reduce firearm-related violence would ultimately fail given the previous experiments of gun control in England and in numerous states.
Should the fact that criminals are committing crimes with the use of guns violate our right to possess guns? The Second Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms, which is part of the bill of rights. With that being said we should take into account that all people who own a gun are not intending to do harm to others. Even if gun control laws happen to get passed, what about the innocent being murdered by gangs or mentally ill people? What if people try to steal possessions while using a gun to scare our American citizens? The cops cannot be there to protect us every second of the day and seconds can be a matter of life and death. Therefore, we should protect the right of free men and likewise punish the criminals who abuse this right of the Second Amendment. This issue completely contradicts the Second Amendment of the citizens of The United States written by our forefathers. Also guns do more good than harm, such as the thrill of hunting game and protecting our family and belongings.
Jacobs, James B., and Kimberly A. Potter. "Keeping Guns out of the ‘Wrong’ Hands: The Brady Law and the Limits of Regulation." The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 86.1 (1995): 93-120. Print.
Gun control is an awfully big issue in the United States today. Many people in America don’t agree with the gun control laws that they have today. Gun control laws only take guns and freedom away from law-abiding citizens. Many citizens have their own reasons for owning a gun. Why would the government want to make it harder for people to own a gun? People that own guns aren’t very likely to be attacked by criminals. Owning a handgun is one of the best ways of protection when used correctly. The second amendment states “the right to bear arms”; does this grant everyone the right to own a gun? Gun control laws have not been proven to do anything for citizens. Gun control laws just make it harder for the good guy average Joe to own a gun. Gun control laws are not a good idea, and are taking part in the loss of our freedom that was given to us.
Sam Brownback once said, “I don't think there should be more gun control. I think there should be more education.” There are many different views on gun control because it is a subject that is not always just for or against, it is more complex than that. Some think guns should be slightly restricted and harder to obtain, while others feel the government should have no say. In the following, the articles, “The Case For Banning Guns” written by Paul Waldman and “The Case Against Banning Guns” by Shikha Dalmia. The articles previously stated are both from the website TheWeek.com.