Throughout history, many political and societal issues on a plethora of topics which societies have faced, although dealt with differently under varying circumstances, are relatively constant. One such topic, that of violence in modern society, is of great importance in the public eye, and governments try to respond to societal violence, whichever way is deemed judicious and appropriate, considering the ways which the public views such matters. Specifically speaking to issues of violence in modern society, gun control is a topic that is enveloped in political controversy. Governments behave differently to combat gun violence, according to their fundamental ideals and the opinions and paradigms of those who society is comprised. The nature or presence of any legislative action is usually …show more content…
government should have a clear indication as to the positive and negative externalities of legislative action. Mostly, gun reform has led to success in abating gun violence, by reducing overall death rates. Perhaps if the U.S. government followed in the footsteps of other countries, gun violence could be greatly reduced. However, legislative action also requires political consideration, which makes laws much harder to enact. Since the government tries to appeal to the majority of the nation while still trying to do what is best for the nation, controversy and conflict arise. However, it is apparent that action needs to take place, the degree to which this occurs can be up for debate. Along with proof of benefit from other countries, the U.S. should create legislation that will appeal to both sides of the political battleground: a balance between preserving the right to bear arms and protecting future generations from unnecessary gun violence. For the only way to make progress is via change, and a lack there of it will guarantee
Each person has a different view on the world. If a person is asked about their view on a certain subject, they will likely show support or disdain for the subject. For example, some people believe abortion is morally wrong. Others view abortion as the mother’s choice since she is carrying the child. On the issue of gun control, people are usually either for or against stricter gun laws. Why do people view the world in the way they do? How do people decide what stance to take on an issue? To answer these questions, sociologists look at the sociological perspective which “stresses the social contexts in which people live” and “examines how these contexts influence people’s lives” (Henslin, 2013, p. 4). Furthermore, the sociological perspective
"The Controversy of Gun Control." Open Discussion about Various Controversies. N.p.. Web. 3 Dec 2013. .
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 control is a very controversial subject now days in politics. My personal view on gun control is that it will never work. I'm am just fore warning you that this paper may be a little bias, but I'll try to give views from both sides.
‘Useless laws weaken necessary laws.’ --- Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu (1689-1775) Importantly, gun ownership doesn’t create a violent society, but lenient gun control does. Nevertheless, bans do not make something disappear, rather harder to control! Therefore a strict, uniform federal gun control system is far more essential so as to ensure no collateral effects of any gun uses!
Opposing sides have for years fought over the laws that govern firearms. For the purposes of this paper "Gun Control" is defined as policies enacted by the government that limit the legal rights of gun owners to own, carry, or use firearms, with the intent of reducing gun crimes such as murder, armed robbery, aggravated rape, and the like. So defined, gun control understandably brings favorable responses from some, and angry objections from others. The gun control debate is generally publicized because of the efforts of the Pro-Gun Lobby or the Anti-Gun Lobby.
On December 14, 2012 Adam Lanza, a 20 year old with asperger’s syndrome, shot his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut . According to the final report by the states attorney’s office he got in the school at 9:30 AM in the morning and shot the principal and the school’s psychologist that went out to the hallway to check loud bangs they heard. He then moved on to class rooms where innocent children were learning and started shooting and by 9:40 AM, just ten minutes later, he took the lives of twenty six people, including twenty children age twelve and below and six adults, before taking his own life (State Report on Sandy Hook Elementary shooting).
Is scary to think about family members or close friends dying innocently because they were victims of a gun shooting. The recent shooting at a 7-Eleven store, across from Cerritos College, has many people talking about gun violence. In America, on of the biggest issue is gun violence. Throughout the years, the gun violence in America has been increasing. Most of the time, the shootings occur at schools, stores and at public places where lots of innocent people get injured or dies. When a shooting happens, the news reporter, social media or at the front page of a newspaper talks about the problems with guns. There are two sides in this gun debate, one is making more laws and the other is more guns. Individuals must consider which side of the debate offers the greatest gain for the least cost. Looking back to laws, making more laws will not work because individuals will break the rules. Many will not stop until they own a gun, legally or illegally. Even though, some individuals do not favor the right to own a gun, owning a gun will determine the live or death of an individual by making sure the individual is safe. Having the right to own guns might help save more people’s lives because a gun will be a really good source of protection. In terms of the gun debate in America, individuals should prioritize personal liberty because having more guns people might feel more safe and protected.
The conversation of gun control and gun regulation has been a great debate over the decades. NRA Executive vice president Wayne LaPierre, in his speech on Newtown Shooting that occurred on December 21st, 2012, addresses the topic of gun control and argues that guns are not the cause of gun violence. LaPierre's project is to instead of gun control and decreasing the numbers of guns, increase the numbers of guns to solve the problem of gun violence. On the other side of debate, an American journalist, Nicholas Kristof, in his journal, "Do We Have the Courage to Stop This?" argues that guns are the cause of gun violence, but they should not be banned. Kristof's project is to regulate guns with many cautions. While these two authors have different arguments and projects, they use similar strategies to advance their claims. This paper will focus on the way each author strategically uses compare and contrast, cause and effect, and problem-solution to advance their claims and how effective these strategies are used.
In "The Effectiveness of Gun Control Laws:." the authors perform a surgical operation on the various views and issues as presented by the industry concerning gun regulation. The publication outlines the laws that have been enacted by congress concerning the regulation of firearms and shows their pros and cons. The authors suggest that there needs to be a more concerted effort by the executive as well as the judiciary so be able to enforce laws concerning firearm issuing and licensing.
Through two decades ago and in recent years gun violence has increased significantly in the various parts of the United States. There are more cases of children and young adults, engaging in violence. Gun violence leads to the death of many civilians annually. Gun violence touches every segment of our society. It increases the probability of deaths in incidents of domestic violence, raises the likelihood of fatalities by those who intend to injure others and among those who attempt to commit crimes. put children and young people at special risk, and disproportionately affect communities of color. Gun violence harmed all the society and it was a nightmare which produced a culture soaked in blood.
The debate over gun control in America has constantly been brought up over the years due to gunmen killing large amounts of people in shootings. From Columbine to Sandy Hook, or the shootings of the two reporters in West Virginia, these public shootings are occurring everywhere. Lawmakers and civilians alike are pushing for increased gun control in hopes of preventing the same tragedies. Anyone that has been affected by the shootings has been pushing Congress and state governments to force new sanctions on the government. Over the past three years, Congress has shot down all the laws despite the large amounts of public support.
Every day some news related to gun violence are being heard all over the world. Shooting in driveway, public places, schools, homicide and suicide are some of different types of gun violence. Shooting on people and killing them is a big issue in the world and different comments are provided about that. One of the most important of them is about gun control laws. Stingl (2013) says “The term gun control as it is used in the United States refers to any action taken by the federal government or by state or local governments to regulate, through legislation, the sale, purchase, safety, and use of handguns and other types of firearms by individual citizens.” According to this idea gun control laws should be stricter and people should not be able to have access to guns easily. However, there are many other people who believe this idea is not a good solution and never help. This essay will demonstrate for and against views about the topic. People who agree with this idea consider: firstly, stricter laws will reduce violence and gun control means crime control. Secondly, some research shows people with gun are more at risks of getting shot. Thirdly, guns can always be misused by their owners and finally, stricter law is the best and the faster way to control crime and make community safe. While opponents say first of all, guns are necessary for people safety and protection. Secondly, guns are not the only tools for killing and violence; there are other weapons too and finally, gun ownership is human rights.
The development of arguments surrounding gun control corresponds to the increased violence and problems related to weapons and firearms use. This then prompted the expansion of gun control initiatives and has shapes public opinion particularly in the promotion of increased regulation to banning. Due to this, it became controversial as it split the opinions of the citizenry particularly in their stance to advance different objectives. Arguably, the process of developing gun control remains to be detrimental due to its capacity to challenge individual rights and liberty, undermine the value of guns and firearms in the promotion of deterrence and self-defense and inability to recognize the commitment of existing reasonable gun management and control initiatives already in place.
The lawmakers of today make laws and they don’t think about the decisions they make from both perspectives. They may say it’s all right to own a handgun but they may have different intentions than the user has on how and why they need one. The owner may need one for their protection but the lawmaker may think it’s for hunting or something other than it causing violence. To ensure these guns are not being used for violence the law needs to make a set of rules and regulations on the conditions of guns. How to use them/abuse them need to be the number one law. It should state guns are not intended to be used for violence of no kind. The law need to enforce the laws they make to ensure proper safety it would eliminate half of the gun violence.