People have questioned gun control long time. Many people wonder if anyone, aside from those who join the law force, should be allowed to carry guns. Benjamin Franklin once said, “Those who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety” (Wright 4). Franklin understood that taking guns away from law-abiding citizens would not uphold their liberty. Some people who argue for gun control state many violent crimes involve guns. Others believe a child could find the gun and something bad could happen to the child or others when a gun is unsafely stored. People who argue against gun control might say there is a huge psychological gap between citizens who shoot to protect themselves or their property and those who go into schools and shoot at others. Criminals will always find a way around gun control laws and will be able to obtain and use guns illegally. The second amendment protects gun rights for individual citizens. Reasonable gun control laws and educational steps can be taken to protect the majority of U.S. citizens. Gun control does not only take guns away from criminals, gun control also limits law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves and their families when necessary.
America’s idea of safety is a concept that varies between each person’s geographical origin, religious beliefs, and ideologies. There is uncertainty on what would make American citizens safer: allowing guns, or restricting them. The controversy over the dangers of guns and what restrictions should be enforced on them is an argument that does not have a clear cut answer. Some say that guns are dangerous and unnecessary and allow tragedies like pubic shootings to happen. Meanwhile others argue that it is their constitutional right to bear arms for self-defense purposes. The posing problem is how to appease to all citizens without conflict from either side.
Why gun control is needed more than most people think we do. Gun control is needed more because there would be fewer deaths. There would also be a lot fewer people hurt in gun fights or gun accidents. The reason gun control is important is because there is a lot of things that have to do with guns. Such as the way they fire, the way the safety works, and a lot of other examples like that and if you don 't know how they work you need to learn how so you could fix them is something happens and so no one would get hurt or killed trying to fix it. The second reason for more gun control would be for more safety for everyone. If there was less gun control then more people would be getting hurt because people don 't know how to use them. An there
Gun control policies are without a doubt, necessary to keep peace and safety among our communities, and prevent our country from falling into a mesh of barbaric chaos. But the extent to which gun control policies should be enforced has been an on-going debate. Primarily the debate revolves around three main aspects of the topic. The sociological, which deals with relationships between gun control laws and the rate of violent crimes either prevented or caused by firearms; the ethical, which discusses with the right of citizens to bear arms against the protection of citizens and crimes; as well as the legal, which deals with the interpretation of the second amendment of the U.S constitution. The following essay examines each factor in depth, and presents arguments from opposing sides regarding each individual aspect of gun control debates.
A study from the American College of Physicians show that firearm homicides and suicides account for 95.9% of the 464,033 gun-related deaths in the United States of America between 1999 and 2013. This statistic shows the terrifying number of intentional gun-related deaths in a country with looser gun control. Also, people who possess weapons and firearms tend to be involved in violence. With America’s high gun ownership of approximately 112 guns per 100 residents, that tendency seems inevitable to most civilians. A study published in the American Journal of Public Health concludes that “legal purchase of a handgun appears to be associated with a long-lasting increased of risk of violent death” (Cummings, Grossman, Koepsell, Savarino and Thompson, 1). This study shows that being exposed to guns will eventually lead to violence. By enforcing stricter gun control and ownership, gun-related homicide and suicide rates are bound to drop. Not to mention, large homicidal acts such as mass shootings are associated with the possession and use of legal firearms. The article “How They Got Their Guns” by The New York Times illustrate that “a vast majority of guns used in 16 recent mass shootings, including two guns believed to be used in the last Orlando attack, were bought legally and with a federal background check” (Buchanan, Keller, Oppel and Victor, 1). With such
“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 right of all Americans to bear arms is a right the Founding Fathers held to equal importance as the Constitution itself. Gun control laws directly violate this right and therefore should not even be under consideration. Even if that issue is overlooked, gun control advocates state that in order to reduce firearm related violence, gun control laws must be implemented to remove the violence caused by firearms. Although this may seem reasonable, the consequences of such laws are ironically counterproductive; they exacerbate the problem instead of fixing it. Besides the fact that the American Constitution guarantees its citizens the right to bear arms, the idea of restricting gun ownership in order to reduce firearm-related violence would ultimately fail given the previous experiments of gun control in England and in numerous states.
The controversy of gun control has raged on in the United States for well over a century. Citizens, gun supporters, law makers and even presidents alike have participated in the debate. The debate has been fought for so long due to a number of reasons. The major reason, however, is because of the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment guarantees the right of the citizens to keep and bear arms. The core motive for people against the ownership of firearms is the amount of violence that can be committed. So, it begs the question – would the banning of guns prevent violence?
Mass-shootings — defined by the FBI as four or more murders occurring during the same calamity, with no distinctive time period between the homicides (Serial Murder) — have stricken across the United States at the rate of about one every two weeks since 2006 (Database of Mass Shootings, 2006-2013). This abysmal statistic has rightfully triggered much debate concerning gun restraints. The theory of gun control pertains towards any efforts intended to regulate, define, or limit the possession, production, sales, and use of guns. Since its conception, the Second Amendment — guaranteeing the “right to bear arms” — has been wildly controversial. 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.
In recent months, there have been 25 tragic mass shootings in the United States, and most of these shootings occurred in schools (CNN). As a result, President Obama and the Democratic Party pushed for a tighter gun control laws (Bernstein). Not everyone will go along with the President Obama 's proposal to push for tighter gun control laws, because the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects people rights to keep and bear arms, which cannot be infringed. The issues with gun control continue to be controversial topics because there are concerns that the government is overreaching their authority. There are discussions about banning and restricting certain guns from the hands of law-abiding citizens. Furthermore, there are
“The gun ownership rates in those more rural parts of the country are about 111 percent higher than the gun ownership rates in the urban areas that have the highest murder rates.” How can something intend to create order in society actually create chaos? Society is the aggregate of people living together in a more or less ordered community. Laws are provided for our own good to use as a guideline when making critical decisions. They are there to prove justice accordingly. There are laws that make life easier than there are laws that protect us, such as the making of laws for gun rights. Gun laws are very important to the extent that they save, and prevent lives from being out of existence. Gun laws create more chaos than order in society