The Negatives Of Gun Control

Do you feel safe right now? If someone wanted to kill you, would you want to have a way to protect yourself, or would you hope that they couldn’t get a weapon to use against your life? These kinds of questions are the ones that everyone asks themselves when they think about gun control. People discuss almost daily both the positives and negatives of letting people own guns and what they think will make society the safest. While most are just common people expressing their own personal values, some scholars have done heavy research on finding an answer that everyone wants to know. Whether or not America would benefit more or less from looser/tighter gun control laws? If two people were to get into an argument, would the likelihood of one of

It isn’t uncommon to hear that somebody was killed by a knife or a car so why don’t people want more restrictions on those. Robert J. Spitzer talks about this in “The Politics of Gun Control”. One reason there is controversy is that other weapons like cars and knives serve other purpose in daily life. Guns exist to serve one purpose, to kill. The main controversy is that thousands of people are killed by guns and it disrupts the daily lives of many Americans making it an issue to discuss. He also mentions that when guns were originally allowed to be carried by civilians, they were much more expensive, were dangerous to use, and were mainly used by farmers to get rid of small animals, not human beings. The firepower of today is a lot more dangerous than when they wrote the amendment. Spitzer also mentions how people use firearms to hunt, but over the course of time, people have had less need to hunt. As such, the need to possess a firearm has also decreased. (Spitzer, 8). While Spitzer’s points are valid ones, they have been said by just about everyone who is anti-gun. With nothing really new to add to the conversation, his argument becomes like Lester’s and does little to influence those debating for less gun control to change their