Persuasive Essay On Gun Control

The Ethics of Gun Control The phrase "Gun Control" means different things to different people. One bumper sticker states that "Gun Control means hitting your target." However one defines gun control, the mere mention of it brings controversy. Opposing sides have for years fought over the laws that govern firearms. For the purposes of this paper "Gun Control" is defined as policies enacted by the government that limit the legal rights of gun owners to own, carry, or use firearms, with the intent of reducing gun crimes such as murder, armed robbery, aggravated rape, and the like.

Gun Control in the United States Gun control is a very heated issue within the country. There are advocates for both sides for wanting stricter gun control and less gun control. Firearms are such a big part of American history that it has been included in our constitution as one of our inalienable rights. The people who want stricter gun control believe that making it harder to get guns and limiting the types of guns people can use makes everyone safer since there’s less firearms in the public. Those who want more lax gun laws believe that it acts as a deterrent and as a safety measure to protect innocent citizens and themselves.

Gun rights and gun control have long histories. Although both sides on the gun debate have claimed to have history on their side, each has presented a favored version of the past (Cornell 2009). The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution states: "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 Founding Fathers included this in our Bill of Rights because they feared the Federal Government might oppress the population if the people did ... ... middle of paper ... ...ls committed those crimes. We should punish the individuals who commit these crimes, and we should imprison those who pose a threat to society so that they do not have the opportunity to cause harm to others.

Gun control will also help prevent robberies and other treacherous hostage situations. In order to shelter the populace of the United States, we have an obligation as voting citizens to enact a strict Gun Control law ridding all weapons, except for hunting rifles, from public use. According to the NCVS (National Crime Victimization Survey) the fifty-four and a half percent of people that threaten an attacker with a gun are more likely to get a gun drawn out in return. The other percentage of the victims who use self-protection or do not do anything have a much better chance of getting away without the attacker pulling out a gun (Gun). Under a strict Gun Control law, when a holdup happens, the attacker is less likely to have a gun, and even if the attacker did somehow obtain a firearm, the victim would not have one to use carelessly and get himself killed.

While the writer is an advocate of gun control laws, the literature demonstrates all too clearly that creating, passing and enforcing such laws is difficult, and... ... middle of paper ... ...owning family. As we just saw in McConnell's piece, in fact, many if not most American gun-owners do support some form of gun control laws which try to prevent the use of firearms by criminals or those with mental problems. The question, as with all laws, is determining precisely what measures will prevent such use of firearms, without infringing improperly on the rights of law-abiding Americans to own firearms. This debate rages in part because there is much emotion on both sides of the argument. Gun-control advocates seek to quell firearms-related violence with laws.

", but are the laws that the Obama administration are attempting to make paving the way for Americans being disarmed in the future? In this paper, I hope to help the reader realize that Obama does not want to take our guns, but the actions we are taking now may not be the best decisions for the present or the future. The majority of the time that gun control is discussed, you will hear points made such as "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." Anti-gun-control lobbyists argue that Obama blames mass shootings, homicides, and suicides on guns. Is Obama placing blame in the wrong place?

The couple who were behind the shooting in San Bernidino bought them legally. Changing the gun laws to make them stricter will not prevent this act of violence. Another example comes from John Lott, Crime Prevention Research Center President. He argues that expanded background checks (supported by President Obama) will not stop mass shootings. He states, “We 're being told that even though these laws didn 't stop these attacks in these states, somehow they would work in the rest of the country," he Said.

It has the strictest gun laws, but who has the highest crime rate in the country? Washington, D.C.”. Many people say that creating stricter gun laws would help in reducing crime and robberies. But people use guns for self-defense against those types of crimes. If gun control laws were enforced, the Second Amendment would be violated.

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.

People don’t respect the gun laws we already have in affect. The laws should be stricter because countless tragic massacres and murders are happening. Guns are meant to be in the possession of people with a license that took test to have them. However, many guns are being sold and exchanged illegally. That’s how we get guns in our community and people in gangs and drug dealers get them into their hands.