Gun control is one of those topics that have not had much improvement on either side because both sides are completely against each other. On one side you have liberal gun control advocates who want to make laws to control who can purchase a fire arm, also a lot are trying to get rid of guns completely. On the other side you have conservative gun owners who feel like their “individual right to bear arms” (USA Today) will be taken away from them if laws were passed that would affect them from buying guns. The authors have made very good arguments about why their side is better and I will be talking about why we should not band but only “keep mentally ill people from buying guns” (USA Today). Gun control seems to have many good points as to …show more content…
A good example of this is Chicago. Even with such strict gun laws, Chicago is at the top of the list with over 500 homicides involving guns in 2012. Since guns are being restricted to people, it is easier for guns to come into the city from other places instead. There are more guns in the streets of Chicago than in Los Angeles and New York. In 2012, the police confiscated 7,400 guns in crimes. This alone makes you think that maybe if guns are taken away then violence will increase. Well another point a gun activist made is that "guns are not the root of the crime problem” (D 'Agostino) and should not be seen as the real problem when it comes to all these deaths in the United States. Instead that the real problem is all the factors that lead up to the violence such as poverty, mental health, and failing …show more content…
If kids have a good education, have everything they need growing up, and do not have a mental health that would make them want to murder someone then more than likely they could be capable of owning as many guns as they want without ever hurting anyone. Those factors need to be considered first before ever making laws that would make it difficult for well-adjusted Americans to get their hands on a gun that could be used to protect themselves against non-adjusted Americans who could rob them. Making a place gun free does not mean that guns will never be able to show up one way or another. Even though it sounds like both sides are complete opposites of each other, there is something they have in common and that is that they want the safety of citizens. Gun control activists goal is to try to restrict the sale of guns to protect citizens from them when their top priority goal should be to “keep guns out of the hands of criminals” (Los Angeles Times) while the anti-gun control activists are trying to do the same by making sure that citizens have a weapon that can be used to protect themselves from any danger presented to
As a result of several recent mass shootings, gun control has become a popular topic. Gun control refers to the laws, background checks, and more protections against mentally ill individuals purchasing firearms. Some of the population believes that gun control should be strengthened, while the others are against it. There have been many situations in which firearms were used to harm innocent people, but gun control is not the solution to the problem we face as a nation.
In America guns have been a part of the country’s society since it’s birth. Throughout history the citizens of the US have used firearms to protect the nation, protect their families, hunt for food and engage in sporting activities. The issue of Guns and gun control is complex. Weighing the rights and liberties of the individual against the welfare and safety of the public has always been a precarious balancing act. In the United States, gun control is one of these tumultuous issues that has both sides firmly entrenched in their positions. Those parties in favor of gun ownership and the freedom to use and keep arms, rely on the fact that the provision for such rights is enshrined in their constitution. In this climate of growing violence, rife with turmoil and crime, gun advocates feel more than ever that their position is justified. As citizens of the “Land of the Free” possessing a gun is a fundamental right, and may even be a necessity... Anti- gun lobbyists point to the same growing violence and gun related crimes in an effort to call on the government to take action. By enacting more laws and stricter control, these people not in favor of guns feel society would be better safer.
Gun control is an issue that is constantly being debated. There are people who are pro gun control and those who believe gun control is unconstitutional to the citizens. Many political leaders and organizations have strong opinions on gun control, which keeps the gun control debate publicized. Gun control is limiting or taking the right of citizens to carry or purchase a gun. Guns are used for protecting the citizens by police officers and the military, as well as for many personal reasons like hunting and self-defense. There are times that guns are used for the wrong reasons like murder, or put in the wrong hands which lead to accidental deaths. Choosing a stand on gun control can be hard, but hearing both sides can help a person make a decision.
This essay will discuss the pros and cons of gun control. Some U.S. States have already adopted some of these gun control laws. I will be talking about the 2nd amendment, public safety, home safety, and do gun control laws really control guns. I hope after you have read this you will be more educated, and can pick your side of the gun control debate. So keep reading and find out more about the gun control laws that the federal and some state governments want to enforce on U.S. Citizens.
I don’t necessarily think that gun ownership should be completed prohibited. In order to make the United States safer, stricter gun laws should be placed. With more gun laws comes less gun tragedies such as mass shootings and accidental shootings. Although many people believe that placing gun laws on American’s is an act against our own personal freedom and “right to bear arms” in the long run we should be thinking more about how to reduce the amount of tragedies that happen every year in the United States. Surely, if your own family member or friend was involved in such violent acts as these, you would feel much safer if gun laws were in place.
Gun control laws aim to restrict or regulate firearms by selecting who can sell, buy and possess certain guns. Criminals do not obey laws and stricter gun control laws or banning guns will have little effect on reducing crimes. There are many myths about gun control reducing acts of gun violence, which are simply not true according to research. People are responsible for the crimes, not the guns themselves. Taking guns away from United States citizens that use them for many reasons, shooting practice, competition, hunting and self-defense, should not be punished for the acts of criminals. As stated by Mytheos Holt, “Guns in the right hands help public safety. Guns in the wrong hands harm public safety”. Research shows that defensive use of guns discourages criminals and reduces crime (Holt 2). Not only is it wrong to penalize law-abiding citizens, it is against the Second Amendment. It is unconstitutional to pass laws that infringe on the Second Amendment right to bear arms.
With all the shootings and random acts of violence, such as the shooting at the movie theatre in Colorado, or the Sandy Hook shootings, stricter gun control laws have been a hot topic in politics and the national mainstream media. The government thinks that gun control being stricter would help to make less of these tragic incidences occur. I am against this thought because I believe that the law-abiding citizens will be the only ones to give up their guns and criminals will then have an upper hand on the innocent. Even though banning guns is supposed to save lives, cities such as Chicago have already shown that stricter gun laws should not be passed because violent murders are still prevalent in these types of cities and strict gun laws have not worked like they were supposed to.
Due to recent shootings in four cities gun control legislation has become a big issue throughout the United States. Government officials have presented legislation for gun control to help reduce mass shootings; however, even with these suggestions for strict gun control twelve states have already passed laws that offer fewer limitations for gun possession. After the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012, Connecticut passed a law to ban gun sales that hold large amounts of ammunition. According to McLeod “in Newtown, Connecticut, the families of ten out of twenty children killed in a December 2012 massacre at the Sandy Hook Elementary School have sued a North Carolina-based gun manufacturer, alleging Remington Outdoor Co.’s Bushmaster
that were created and then dismissed, the statistics covering questions on gun-control, and finally, discussing the results in my perspective of gun-control. I do stand on the opposing side of gun-control for multiple reasons that I described in the discussion, but I do understand where the proponents are coming from. Guns are very dangerous and should, yes, always be regulated, but only to an extent. Guns are our freedom of survival and our ability to hunt for game. Our country has gone centuries with this law standing its place in the Constitution, so I wouldn’t agree with getting rid of it when statistics show we’re more likely to go downhill then up. In my perspective, when you give someone a gun in order to protect themselves, they will understand the meaning of that gun. When you take away someone’s firearms when dealing with someone who does have a firearm, in my opinion, that person will beg you for a gun. The right to bear arms is a very protective, yet dangerous amendment, but in order to keep our homeland safe, sometimes those types of decisions must be made. The controversy over our right to bear arms will most likely remain active for the time being, and that’s understandable, but hopefully our government and majority of our society realizes the bigger picture
Author Asha Bendele talks about this subject in her article, “Loss & Hope.” She states that, “According to The U.S Census Bureau, it (Chicago) has the highest crime rate throughout the nation” (112). The average person in Chicago cannot legally get access to a firearm, but yet people still are able to get their hands on them. This significantly proves that a gun ban will do nothing but hurt this country and make criminal activity rise. Most of those against the Second Amendment, want other major cities to model what Chicago has done with gun laws. Once these other cities begin to model themselves after the city of Chicago, we would immediately start to see an increase of violence, drug use and firearm related crime. Schools have also become victim to the “gun free zone” curse. Serious criminals know that, in these areas, there is no one that can stand up to them, which gives them plenty of time to commit these evil acts and get away unharmed. Author Grant Arnold discusses this in, “Arming the Good Guys: School Zones and the Second Amendment.” He states, “Policies making areas ‘gun free’ provide a sense of safety to those who engage in magical thinking, but in practice, of course, killers aren 't stopped by gun-free zones. As always, it 's the honest people — the very ones you want to be armed — who tend to obey the law” (487). We need to realize that “gun free zones” are really just an area for the people there to be sitting ducks. The last thing we ever want to see on the news, is the death of a child who was unprotected due to these laws. The only way we can ever think to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a
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.
Is scary to think about family members or close friends dying innocently because they were victims of a gun shooting. The recent shooting at a 7-Eleven store, across from Cerritos College, has many people talking about gun violence. In America, on of the biggest issue is gun violence. Throughout the years, the gun violence in America has been increasing. Most of the time, the shootings occur at schools, stores and at public places where lots of innocent people get injured or dies. When a shooting happens, the news reporter, social media or at the front page of a newspaper talks about the problems with guns. There are two sides in this gun debate, one is making more laws and the other is more guns. Individuals must consider which side of the debate offers the greatest gain for the least cost. Looking back to laws, making more laws will not work because individuals will break the rules. Many will not stop until they own a gun, legally or illegally. Even though, some individuals do not favor the right to own a gun, owning a gun will determine the live or death of an individual by making sure the individual is safe. Having the right to own guns might help save more people’s lives because a gun will be a really good source of protection. In terms of the gun debate in America, individuals should prioritize personal liberty because having more guns people might feel more safe and protected.
John Luik author of the article “The Increased Availability of Guns Reduces Crime” and Sabina Thaler the author of the article “The Claim of Increased Gun Availability Reduces Crime is Unfounded” are two examples of people having different opinions on such a debatable topic. Both authors talk about guns taking people’s lives, Thalers article focuses on guns taking innocent people’s lives, and Luiks article focuses on guns being innocent people’s protection. Many gun supporters will say that more guns will bring down the crime rate. These same believers will give facts stating that the more guns in a state, the less likely gun owners will use them. “The chances of innocent people being the victims of violent crime, including murder, decrease—not increase—when access to guns is made easier” (Luik).
Those who argue for gun control usually state guns are a part of most violent crimes. However, this is not always true. While it is true that limiting gun ownership with laws could prevent individuals from possessing guns, it does not prevent people from illegally having or using guns. Those who carry guns legally are not the problem. According to Mark Gius, the author of “Gun Ownership and the Gun Control Index”, “…only about 25% of total violent crime is committed by a person using a gun, no inferences...
Firstly, stricter laws will reduce violence, and gun control means crime control. There are some countries in the world that have introduced stricter laws and were successful to control the crimes ...