The Effects and Consequences of Gun Control

The continuing Mass Shootings in the United States has caused the gun control debate to intensify. While anti-gun control advocates say the Second Amendment guarantees each individual the right to bear arms, the pro-gun control group reads the Second Amendment as a collective right to bear arms; meaning organized militia are the only ones with that right. This essay will analyse the effectiveness of several different articles which present arguments for and against gun control. Charles W. Collier’s article, “Gun Control in America: An Autopsy Report”, dives into the controversial topic of gun ownership and gun control in the United States. He uses recent shootings, including the George Zimmerman case and the Connecticut elementary school shooting, to present his case that gun violence will remain in the United States as long as guns remain high in number and low in regulation.

While using a point-counterpoint style to argue against gun control I will show guns are best controlled by good aim. The government must keep guns out of the hands of violent criminals and the mentally ill, and they must not limit the rest of the society from owning them. Gun control advocates will argue that gun ownership is not a right and is not protected by the 2nd amendment. They further believe guns are harmful to society. Gun control advocates also believe guns are not needed for self-defense.

Gun control advocates suggest that confining gun ownership would reduce the number of violent gun-related crimes, suicides, and deaths; rigorous background checks and mandatory waiting periods would help to deter criminals and possible tragedies; and that assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition magazines should be banned from public use, as police officers and military personnel are the only officials who actually need them. Adversaries argue that criminals will always find a way to get their guns, consequently leaving law-abiding citizens defenseless; crimes are often prevented by the prophylactic effect of the possibility of victim gun possession; and that the Second Amendment to the Constitution protects individuals’ right to gun ownership. Gun control is a considerable system that galvanizes Americans apropos several quandaries; therefore is it vital to be conscious of the pure facts associated with gun restriction, and even more crucial to comprehend the advantages and disadvantages. The firearms concerning gun control policies are typically classified into three extensive categorie... ... middle of paper ... ... dependent upon the government for safety and fortification depicts a nightmare. Works Cited Cook, Philip J., and Jens Ludwig.

Criminology & Public Policy, 2(3), 363. Lott, J. (1998). More guns, less crime: understanding crime and gun-control laws. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

If you think a gun with that much firepower needs to be banned, then you should also ban cars with extreme horsepower because why would a person need that much horsepower? Guns do not kill people; people kill people and use a gun as an object to kill the person. The gun is not aiming its barrel at the person and pulling the trigger. If guns kill people than forks and spoons make people fat, pencils misspell words, and cars drive drunk. There have been many school shootings in the past decade, but I bet you have never heard of the Appalachian School of Law, Central High School, Clackamas Mall, Palace Theater, or Players Bar and Grill shootings.

Guns in America are accepted as long as you are of age and have a permit to legally carry a firearm. The issue of that the US government have no idea of the reasoning why the buyers are equipping these guns, with those guns being handed in to the private hands of American citizens its only by faith what those people will do with this firearm. According to Reno (1993) in Promising strategies, To Reduce Gun Violence, “In 1996 (the most recent year for which are available), 34,00 people died from gunfire in the United States. Of these deaths, approximately 54 percent resulted from suicide, 41 percent resulted from homicide, and 3 percent were unintentional.” (Section I). Guns were meant to protect you and others that may be around but is it ethical to take another man/women’s life?

Given the statistics of vicious crimes committed in the United States versus the amount of firearms privately owned, guns are not the problem in our country and should not be banned. A great deal of society believes gun-free zones will help lower the amount of violent crimes committed in the United States. In reality a great deal of cities and countries that have strict gun-free zones report the opposite results. A British CNN reporter known as Piers Morgan is one of the biggest advocates for banning guns. In the United Kingdom there was a shooting spree in Scotland that resulted in a law banning private ownership of firearms.

Rather than put more restrictions on guns and gun owners, we should be able to freely protect ourselves and our fellow man. As we look at the way pro gun control parties are planning on enforcing gun control, you may begin to question why we would even consider using such drastic means. The idea that limiting the size of a magazine or regulating the type of gun you can purchase or even doing something as simple as a background check can stop murders like the Connecticut shooting from happening is very far-fetched. In Making Gun Control Happen the author, Patrick Radden Keefe, writes from a pro gun control standpoint. He describes that one obvious change would be to “mandate a criminal background check for all gun purchases” as it would obviously stop criminals from getting their hands on a weapon (Keefe).

They discuss issues such as mental stability, the Constitution, and the type of gun that is legal to own. Those that are in favor of changing gun laws believe due to recent events such as Sandy Hook, The laws should ban gun ownership to a citizen unless they are certified to own one. The citizens that oppose changing gun laws are saying people need self defense and bring up the recent Boston Bomber incident. Those that are trying to change the gun laws are saying that the Constitution was written a long time ago and needs to be updated about a person’s self defense. Those who are against change are saying that the Constitution cannot be changed because the guns aren’t to blame but the people that are using them.

Along with the fact, Obama’s gun control plan is to also ban the use of assault rifles and high-capacity magazines. Yet, these ideas pose a threat to the second amendment, which protects the right to keep and bear arms. Gun control laws don’t need to be put into action, no matter how well the laws are assumed to be protecting. Although the abolition of gun control has its perks, some may argue that keeping and implementing gun control has advantages, too. For example, gun control protects: law-abiding citizens, children, and any other type of citizen from other harmful citizens, such as criminals.