Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
gun control increases crime rates
is gun control effective in reducing crime essays
concealed carry and crime rates essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: gun control increases crime rates
Gun control does not work
Crime has been the issue since the beginning of human government. The question, how does one reduce crime? - has pondered the thoughts of many. The solutions comes in all forms. One of these being gun control. However there is a problem with gun control. Whether it is a law abiding citizen or a criminal, they will end up with more guns. The British in 1776 lost a war against one of her colonies, now known as the United States of America. It started over the taking of arms and ended with men baring arms. The fact of matter is, gun control does not work.
Gun control does not work because when there is high gun control, criminals still own guns. Statistics of crime rates before and after the bans had been put in place
…show more content…
Police have cracked down on the drug war in these areas. For years the war on drugs has brought down many lives, brought crime to power that is now diminished, and strengthened the police force. The police force has new equipment and weaponry far superior to the gangs. Technology, such as drones and new ways to gather data have put police one step ahead of crime. Brian Doherty who wrote “You Know Less Than You Think About Guns stated, that “One weak- gun-law state, Louisiana, were taken out of the equation, "the remaining nine lowest-regulation states have an average gun homicide rate of 2.8 per 100,000, which is 12.5% less than the average of the ten states with the strictest gun control laws," he found. Neil Howe, from “what’s behind in the world of crime mention he fact quoted “the rate of violent crime victimizations . . . violence has subsided the most. Washington, D.C. and Los Angeles have experienced 76% and 90% decreases in the murder rate since 1992, respectively.” These statistics prove good guns lower crime putting a fallacy in gun …show more content…
Most criminals are deterred to do crime when they realize someone is armed. No one smart, willingly wants to put themselves in a position to be shot. Wayne quoted “39 percent did not commit specific crime for the fear that the victim was armed.” A natural fear lies with the human being, he will take precautions to make sure he is safe. When the citizen is armed and one can see that. It is a deterrent for the criminal to pursue that being. Conceal carry is on the rise, now criminals must be extra cautious of their target, for it may lead to their demise. An argument from the opposite side on the matter is that the conceal carry community is a threat to law enforcement, however 57 percent of non-law abiding citizens have a worse fear of being stopped by the averaged armed citizen then by the police force. The people are not bounded to as much regulation as an officer. The only variable for a citizen’s permission to shoot is, is his life is in danger or someone else’s life is in danger, or if property is being taken or invaded. Police have more regulation for their reasons to shoot a
Gun admirers have statistics that will prove their side on guns saving lives. According to one study by Lott “… for each additional year that laws allowing people to carry concealed handguns were on the books, robberies decli...
Firstly, the claims that guns contributing to higher crime rates are completely over exaggerated. Most people are spoon-fed by the mainstream media that guns contribute to higher crime rates. In fact, in large cities like Chicago it has been proven that laws like handgun bans have worsened crime rather than alleviate it. When they did this in Chicago, politicians were hoping that this would bring crime levels down (Peterson 25). In the midst of all this, everyone as soon as the politicians proclaimed it would work, was singing their praises and saying that it would, or so they thought. So did the handgun ban succeed? Not necessarily, the article A Splendid, Precarious Victory proves this point. The author Dan Peterson provides very gut wrenching statistics. It states, “in recent years, while the handgun ban was in place, the percentage committed with handguns has consistently been 70 percent or more” (Peterson 25). Clearly, this proves that the mainstream media, anti-gun groups and politicians have distorted the truth about just how hazardous gun control is. This disturbing information should be a wake up call to those who feel that gun control works. Finally, this proves that gun control is unproductive. These kinds of laws ...
In the United States of America, there is much debate about the effectiveness and practicality of concealed firearms. Many citizens today are trying to support their claim with old, outdated evidence and targeted research to attempt to prove a point, but can not escape the truth. Although Concealed firearms may sound appealing to reduce crime rates and stop violence, new evidence suggests otherwise. Recently there has been trends of certain lunatics who own guns that decide to shoot innocent people, justifying the need for more strict gun control laws. The purpose of this paper is to educate and inform about the immensely important topic of concealed firearms, with focus on what effect it has on society and crime rates. We will go over modern
Guns and crime seem to fit together like peanut butter and jelly, but is that really the case? There are two ways to look at gun control, but one realization that needs to be made and that’s that guns are powerful. Guns can either be used for defending and protecting people or they can be used to harm and kill people. People have different views on whether guns are being used for protection or being used to harm and kill others. The majority of people that think guns are being used for safety and defense oppose gun control laws. On the other hand the majority of people who think guns are being used to heartlessly slaughtered people are for stricter gun control laws. People opposed to gun control thinking it will be taking away some of their rights; whereas, those in favor of gun control thinking it will help protect people.
Gun control is a highly controversial topic in today’s world where the fight is between the liberal and the conservatives. Many people believe that guns should be banned due to many recent massacres that have happened whereas others are wanting people to have background checks done before owning a gun. I am against gun control because banning handguns in the United States should not be allowed because handguns fail to protect the people and it is ineffective.
The problem of gun control laws, their correlation with the Second Amendment, and the federal laws and policies for reduction of gun violence is widely discussed in many theoretical sources and scientific research literature. For example, Phillip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig (2000) speak about gun violence in the everyday life of America. They put forward the facts about the crime and mass massacre connected with gun ownership and inappropriate use. They consider political, social, and economic reasons for gun ownership control by analyzing the psychological and moral influences of gun violence victimization and the main trends of overcoming it. The authors also make an outline on the major measures that should be taken to reduce gun violence (Cook & Ludwig, 2000).
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.
The day our school had a mass shooting all they heard was gunshots, the teacher screaming at the kids to get down and under their desks as she ran out of the room soon to be back in a panic the kids looked up to the man with the gun. Then a few more shots go off and it was so silent for a second to only realize that the police had shot the man with the gun. Are guns really the cause of mass shootings, or is it the people who should never have been allowed a gun in their hands, in the first place. Therefore stricter gun control laws won't stop gun violence.
Crime and guns. The two seem to go hand in hand with one another. But are the two really associated? Do guns necessarily lead to crime? And if so do laws placing restrictions on firearm ownership and use stop the crime or protect the citizens? These are the questions many citizens and lawmakers are asking themselves when setting about to create gun control laws. The debate over gun control, however, is nothing new. In 1924, Presidential Candidate, Robert La Follete said, “our choice is not merely to support or oppose gun control but to decide who can own which guns under what conditions.” Clearly this debate still goes on today and is the very reason for the formation of gun control laws.
Gun Control laws can potentially affect violence rates in a number of ways. Guns could provide protection, put people at risk, encourage crime or even cause death. The availability of guns could could enable violent crimes or possibly help to stop them (Kleck and Paterson 2). Many criminals choose guns in violent actions over other weapons most likely due to their accessibility and long range threat. Some people believe you should control guns, while others believe there is nothing wrong.
John Lott once said, ”Some people use guns for horrible things, but some people use guns to prevent horrible things from happening”(Interview with John R. Lott Jr.,4). It is legal to use guns to prevent great bodily injury or death. The second amendment allows the individual to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation (Right-to-Carry, 1). The definition of resist is to, “withstand, strive against, or oppose.” Healthy American citizens have the right to do just that when it comes to any crime that can potentially cause them great bodily harm, or has the potential to kill them. Criminologist Gary Kleck concluded,” robbery and assault victims who used a gun to resist were less likely to be attacked or suffer an injury than those who did not use a gun or any other method to resist, or those who did not resist at all”(Right-to-Carry,1). Concealed handgun laws lower violent crimes for two reasons. First, criminals are afraid of potential victims that can defend themselves. Second, victims with guns are capable of protecting themselves (Interview with John R. Lott Jr., 1). Criminals who face higher penalties, like a gunshot wound, tend to not commit crimes. For every year a concealed weapon law is effective, murder r...
According to a ABC news report, “Murder rates remain same in tough gun law states” was the headline. “The National Rifle Association claimed the research of this had no effect on crime.” But there are other articles that say that crime rates have gone down since gun laws were more regulated in certain states. Perhaps people just did not obey it in a certain state. Maybe it was harder to control. “A new study finds that murder rates did not drop any faster when states had stricter gun laws.” Most American now support more gun control laws. The laws could not have been strict enough there. There are many reasons why it could not have worked.
...nforcement and criminal imprisonment had more of an effect on crime then any gun control law. Gun education and hunter’s education also improved. Focusing efforts on the root of the problem has yielded results and lowered crime. Crime rate has steadily lowered as more guns entered the private market.
Gun control only takes guns away from law-abiding people and it does nothing to stop criminals from buying illegal guns, who are unlikely to obey the law and register their guns at all. Most of the time the term gun control is improperly used. The definition of gun control is the government regulation of possession and use of firearms by private citizens. The government is using it as way to take our right to bear arms away from us.
How do laws that make it harder for dangerous people to acquire guns, infringe a responsible gun owner?