it and, at a long term, violence will no longer exists in the world. The third argument to support gun control is
Viewpoint 2 One of the author against gun control is Jeff Cooper, the creator of Advanced Military CombatPistol Course and the father of modern pistol technique, according to National Rifle Association (NRA). In his book “Art of the Rifle”, he said “The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles.” In other words, for him, gun should not be controlled, should not be restricted to several people because, violence should be used to stop violence. As a matter of fact, in daily
…show more content…
But, the thing with violence is that it is already this “superior mean”. So, we can plainly see that violence can’t be stopped by nothing else except violence itself. For this reason, Cooper is against gun control and in this similar way of fighting violence by using violence, Balai Lama says “If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun”[ http://www.wiseoldsayings.com/gun-control-quotes/]. Another argument against gun control is the fact that it infringes the right of self-defense. According to the National Rifle Association (NRA), guns are used for self-defense 2.5 million times a year [ NRA, "Chris Cox's NRA Armed Citizen," www.nra.org/armedcitizen (accessed Oct. 6, 2014) ]. Through this statistic, it is important to deduce that weapons are used by the population, to defend and protect themselves against dangerous people or use it to face difficult situations and so, gun laws would make it more difficult for people to protect their homes and families. Moreover, since security, police cannot totally protect
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
Left, right, Liberal, Conservative, Democratic, Republican. There are a lot of synonyms for the sides of our nation divided. Divided on many things: religion, political views, morals, etc.. For a nation that prides ourselves on extraordinary security and unity, it is quite ironic that so many issues can cause such distress and uproar within communities. One such issue is gun control. As a white male in a middle-lower class family that has never owned a gun, I may be somewhat biased. Objectively as I can, I am going to report the facts and more importantly, try to find the core issues at play.
He demonstrates when guns are found in every household, gun control can do little to restrict access to guns from potential criminals. (McMahan, 3) So, McMahan’s main premises comes into play, either everyone has guns, including criminals, or nobody has guns. “Gun advocates prefer for both rather than neither to have them” McMahan remarks, but ultimately that will just leave the country open to more violence and tragedies. “As more private individuals acquire guns, the power of the police declines, personal security becomes a matter of self help, and the unarmed have an incentive to get guns.” (McMahan, 2) Now everyone is armed, and everyone has the ability to kill anyone in an instant, making everyone less secure. Just as all the states would be safer if nobody were to possess the nuclear weapons, our country would be safer if guns were banned from private individuals and criminals.
“It is estimated that there are 310 million non – military guns in America” (O’Brien and Stanton). Many people that own a firearm usually have more than one gun. Also, a majority of gun owners feel that owning a firearm is the best way to protect themselves at home. With the large number of guns said to be in America, there needs to be a way to prevent the number of frequently occurring mass shootings. The solution to this issue is called gun control. Gun control needs to be implied more in our society because gun related crimes are mostly committed by those diagnosed with mental illnesses, there is no contradiction with the second amendment, it has the ability to lower the amount of mass shootings in the United States, and universal background checks help prevent mass shootings.
Gun control is a topic of tolerance as well as intolerance, depending on the person’s point of view. We can try to push people towards a brighter future in which guns are carefully watched and handed for. Although we can't change everyone's mind we can better educate them on the dangers as well as the bright side of a gun. Someone who wants to do bad will, criminals do the killing not the gun.
“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.
Gun control is a very controversial topic in both the United States and around the world. America in particular has been a battleground for debate on the subject in recent years. The debate is centered around two broad contradicting viewpoints regarding the answer to gun violence. David Kopel, who is an American author, attorney, and current research director of the Independence Institute in Colorado, identifies the pro-gun crowd as critics of gun control who believe that it violates the right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and by forty-three States Constitutions (Kopel, “Hold Your Fire” par. 6). The other side of the argument consists of people who Kopel describes as well meaning Americans who believe that the answer to gun crime is gun control (Kopel, “Hold Your Fire” par. 4).
There is an American consensus for some form of gun control. “…[F]irearms were involved in two-thirds of all murders in the United States and [t]he United States leads the world's richest nations in gun deaths…murders, suicides, and accidental deaths due to guns - according to a study published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the International Journal of Epidemiology” (Lepore). There might be some far extreme people who think that all guns should be banned but most sane Americans do not think that gun rights should be abolished. Americans regard self-defense as the most compelling reason to have a gun and twenty-two percent of households have handguns in the United States. However many people do think that gun control laws must be enacted and enforced. Pro-gun extremists and the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) must understand that there is a real for many people at the uncontrolled s...
Gun violence in America is a public health crisis, which needs to be recognized and changed by legislatures, and the voting American. As conscious Americans, we need to vote for changes to gun laws that would improve background checks nation-wide, make firearm registration mandatory, restrict the sale of assault weapons and weapon modifications that give the shooter military-grade fire power, and invest in gun-safe technology and safe firearms storage designs. This type of technology will help prevent criminally oriented people from accessing guns, and will help prevent the accidental deaths of many children by guns. This essay will explain the reforms needed to help ensure Americans can still exercise their 2nd amendment right of owning firearms, and preventing the unnecessary deaths of many Americans at the same time.
The debate over gun control in America has constantly brought up over the years due to gunmen killing large amounts of civilizations 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. Anybody that has been affected by the shootings have been pushing Congress and state governments to force new sanctions on government. With the past three years, Congress has shot down all the laws despite the large amounts of public support. Adding more gun control isn’t going to stop the mass shootings from happening.
People have questioned gun control long time. Many people wonder if anyone, aside from those who join the law force, should be allowed to carry guns. Benjamin Franklin once said, “Those who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety” (Wright 4). Franklin understood that taking guns away from law-abiding citizens would not uphold their liberty. Some people who argue for gun control state many violent crimes involve guns. Others believe a child could find the gun and something bad could happen to the child or others when a gun is unsafely stored. People who argue against gun control might say there is a huge psychological gap between citizens who shoot to protect themselves or their property and those who go into schools and shoot at others. Criminals will always find a way around gun control laws and will be able to obtain and use guns illegally. The second amendment protects gun rights for individual citizens. Reasonable gun control laws and educational steps can be taken to protect the majority of U.S. citizens. Gun control does not only take guns away from criminals, gun control also limits law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves and their families when necessary.
There is no single answer to end the debate on gun control. Many variables must be examined but the evidence presented cannot be ignored. Gun control does not end violence, but makes the law-abiding citizens more vulnerable. In the 1878 Arkansas case of Wilson v. State, a judge stated, “Common sense dictates that inanimate objects, such as guns, are not responsible for human behavior. We don’t hold a match responsible for arson or a camera responsible for pornography. We rightly hold the people who misuse these tools liable. The same should be true for guns.”
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.
Central in the arguments against gun control is its ability to restrict any citizen of the United States the right to own guns which is protected under the constitution. Specifically, due recognition is made to its connection to the 2nd Amendment wherein it seeks to protect the individual liberties of people. This facet also applies to gun ownership regardless of the original objective and intention. “The second amendment from the Bill of Rights grants private citizens the right to bear arms. Thus, people who stand firmly against gun control insist that no legislation, technically, should have the right to take away a citizen’s guns without first repealing the amendment in question” (Groberman 1). A good approach to consider in highlighting this part comes from depriving the citizen of his basic right on the basis of specific presumption that it would be used for violence or crim...
Listverse,. '10 Arguments For Gun Control - Listverse '. N.p., 2014. Web. 30 Oct. 2014.