Gun Control Argumentative Analysis

I.

Historical Background The controversy of gun control has always been a topic of interest of Americans for a long time. As many violent crimes, especially organized crimes in the 1930’s, were done with some sorts of firearms, attempting to lower the number of guns available for use seemed to be a logical solution to the problem. First account of gun control was the “National Firearm Act of 1934” (N/A, History of Gun-Control Legislation, 1). “200 dollars of tax was placed on the production of machine guns and sawed of shotgun.” During the time period, as organized crime was the primary source of crimes in the US, the gun law then wasn’t directed toward the citizens. Over 30 years later, gun control is once again a topic of debate as public figures such as President John F. Kennedy, his brother Senator Robert F.

While anti-gun activists preach that reducing guns owned per capita will decrease the crime rates, the altercation of the crime rates is proven to happen for a different reason. Switzerland, the country with the third most amount of gun per civilian, is one of the safest country around the world. Despite guns being completely legal, In 2014 there were only .52 deaths per 100,000 civilians in Sweden. This proves that the number of guns the civilians own is not directly relevant to the number of crimes. Another great example of gun control being irrelevant to the safety of a country is the effects that gun control had in the UK. After the UK banned all guns, the crime rate never decreased. (Agretha 9) Yes, the crime done with firearms was significantly decreased, yet violent crime rates increased. Even though the guns are no longer in the streets, the criminals will still accomplish their planned activity one way or another. Our government must abandon the idea that banning guns will affect the number of crimes, and attack the real problems that are causing these