The gun owners agree with the new laws, that are restricting the accessibility of guns, but they still think guns should be allowed in US. The views from the other people, who do not own guns, are different; they are opposing the guns, and are arguing that guns should not be permitted in America. Especially, since the school shootings, this social issue became a huge conflict, and lots of new laws were created. The new laws are favored by the opponents of guns and even to the guns owners. Guns can be either a helpful or a harmful instrument whether if it is used in a right or wrong way, but to prevent the guns from getting used in a wrong way, the only solution is to create new stricter laws and use the laws properly.
The discussion about gun control is far-gone, and America should enact laws that will require gun owners to register their firearms. A background check on every citizen bearing a gun is necessary so that guns do not land in the arms of felons and the mentally ill. Thinking that people can use guns to fight for their liberty is a far gone idea that needs a second thought. However, gun control is not the only solution because it is necessary to educate the population on the risks of keeping guns and asking them to remit the guns at their own will. Sources "Gun Control And Gun Rights."
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 usage stop the crime or protect the citizens?
The Obama administration is making valiant efforts to reduce gun violence in our country, and protect American citizens, but they need to re-evaluate some of their efforts. Both advocates of gun control and groups that oppose gun control were stricken with heartbreak over the massive shootings. Both parties want to help reduce gun violence, but is the Obama administration taking the right steps? Even though Obama and his administration have good intentions, they do not have the most efficient approach to reduction of gun violence. They are so worried about the safety of our people, that they are creating laws from a knee jerk reaction.
The gun control debate has been in the news a lot lately. Their are two clear sides to the debate. One side states that they don’t want their second amendment rights taken away. While the other side sees guns as dangerous and wants reforms set in place so that certain people can’t have access to them. Some are against reform that, “private citizens who own guns are constantly told by gun-control advocates that only fully trained government agents should be allowed to possess and use guns” (Krey 41).
When presenting the proposal to society; consideration is needed on what would happen in the likelihood that there is a large disapproval rate. The ethical ramifications could be a negative factor in not being able to get the proposal passed by knowing how society reacts to gun control. There are constant arguments when the suggestion of banning guns is presented. Most of the argues involves rights and discrimination issues. Since most criminals will get a gun if they want it; some individuals in society feel that by owning a gun; they can protect themselves better from the criminal and that crimes involving guns with stop.
Current lawmakers believe that any possession of firearms leads to serious danger because of the way that they might be used. It is also reported that since 2000, most American citizens have been in favor of stricter gun laws (Dreier 92). These lawmakers look toward the tragedies of Newtown, Connecticut and of Aurora, Colorado. They realize that guns pose a legitimate threat to the safety of the United States and the well-being of its citizens. While the safety and well-being of the American public is important, these lawmakers are taking the wrong approach in their strides for protection.
Gun-control advocates seek to quell firearms-related violence with laws. Pro-gun forces, led by the NRA, fear what they see as a gradual erosion of Second Amendment rights. Both sides agree, however, that gun control laws do prevent some criminals and mentally ill from buying guns, and that is at least one small step in the fight against gun-related crime and violence.
Since it is a national issue, this essay will focus on gun control from the perspective of a gun advocate and provide evidence as to why gun ownership must be preserved and enforced. If gun control measures become too severe, civilians would be disarmed against criminals who would cause them harm, as the civilian population would have no way to defend themselves. Since gun control is a largely controversial issue, there are many political individuals and groups on both sides of the issue that struggle to either preserve gun ownership or increase regulations on firearms. In recent years, gun control supporters, such as President Barack Obama, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the Brady Campaign and the Coalition to Stop Gun Vio... ... middle of paper ... ...r "assault" weapons, as to pass legislation to prevent gun owners from possessing such firearms. Although the debate still rages on about gun control, what remains important is that the right of the people to bear arms to be preserved, as a society with a disarmed people will be at the mercy of the criminals, and possible oppressive government, who will use force against those who can't defend themselves.
Gun Control in America I do not believe there is a need for more gun control in the United States. Gun control is strict enough. Gun control law is designed to impose legal measures to license, control, or restrict the ownership of firearms by members of the public. By strengthening the gun laws you are only hurting the average citizen who has the right to bear arms. They should do background checks for any mental illnesses, past criminal activity including petty crime, and whether or not they contribute to the community.