In Guns don’t kill people; gun control laws kill people, Chuck Baldwin defends that “Had these victims been allowed and encouraged to carry their own arms for self-defense, the death toll would doubtless have been much less,” showing that if there were no such things as gun free zones, these shooting victims would have been allowed to defend themselves from a criminal. However, Bruce Gold argues “Civilians should leave crime prevention to the Police who are properly equipped to investigate following the crime 's completion,” saying that the only defense that people need is the police instead of taking matters into their own hands when trying to defend themselves from a crime. What are some good reasons to defend the rights to have guns for …show more content…
The main point to this argument is that guns are saving more lives than they take, believe it or not. The next reason that guns should be allowed for lawful purposes is that carry laws can help reduce crime day in and day out. Studies are showing that thousands of lives are being saved yearly because of the allowance of citizens carrying firearms. The GOA conducted a study and found that; “States which passed concealed carry laws reduced their murder rate by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%,” this certain statistic backs up the fact that being allowed to have a concealed carry license actually have decreased the numbers of deaths in states. As long as someone has a concealed handgun license, they should always be able to have their guns with them to keep away from being injured. The activists that argue against the use of guns for lawful purposes can have their points, but the facts back up how many more deaths are avoided by being able to use a …show more content…
It seems obvious that a criminal would have a much easier time trying to rob a person or house knowing that these citizens weren’t allowed to have firearms. The GOA defends this by showing that, “Kennesaw, GA. In 1982, this suburb of Atlanta passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in the house. The residential burglary rate subsequently dropped 89% in Kennesaw, compared to the modest 10.4% drop in Georgia as a whole,” this fact alone shows that criminals are frightened to target citizens knowing that they have at least one firearm present. Being able to get in the way of criminals from robbing a person or house is a big positive because that by itself can save so many lives a day. The truth is that owning firearms and being able to use them for lawful purposes even saves people from the scare of
Some people believe that extremely tight gun control laws will eliminate crime, but gun control laws only prevent the 'good guys' from obtaining firearms. Criminals will always have ways of getting weapons, whether it be from the black market, cross borders, or illegal street sales. New gun control laws will not stop them. Since the shootings of Columbine High School, Virginia Tech, and Sandy Hook, the frequency of mass shootings has increased greatly. Gun control is not effective as it has not been shown to actually reduce the number of gun-related crimes. Instead of considering a ban of private firearm possession, and violating individual ownership rights, it may be more practical to consider the option of partially restricting firearm access.
McMahan, 3) So, McMahan’s main premises come into play, either everyone has guns, including criminals, or nobody has guns. “Gun advocates prefer for both rather than neither to have them” McMahan remarks, but ultimately that will just leave the country open to more violence and tragedies. “As more private individuals acquire guns, the power of the police declines, personal security becomes a matter of self help, and the unarmed have an incentive to get guns.” (McMahan, 2) Now everyone is armed, and everyone has the ability to kill anyone in an instant, making everyone less secure. Just as all the states would be safer if nobody were to possess the nuclear weapons, our country would be safer if guns were banned from private individuals and criminals.
Law abiding citizens should have the right to protect themselves against criminals. You are less likely to suffer an injury when attacked if you are carrying a handgun, as opposed to other methods of self-protection. The right to carry a concealed handgun is protected by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Constitution states “the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed” (ProCon.org 1).Carrying a handgun could keep a lot of people from being killed during a public shooting incident. Concealed handguns protect citizens from violent crimes such as burglary and robbery. Most criminals are armed and you don’t have much of a chance of survival if you are not carrying a
One of the biggest reasons that handguns should not be banned is because of the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment 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.” People who argue that guns should be banned state the Second Amendment was not intended for the regular civilian, but rather the militia. This is where they are wrong. The Supreme court has taken a case like this in Heller vs District of Columbia. Heller had been caught using a handgun and sued the U.S. on the right for civilians to bear arms. The Court decided and interpreted the Second Amendment as the right for all the civilians to bear arms and not just the militia. Also along with amendments and acts, there are two different acts that put restrictions on who can and cannot buy guns. The Gun Act of 1968 and the Brady Act both put different restrictions on who can buy guns. The Gun Act of 1968 has te...
Comparing the United States’ homicidal statistics to England and Wales’, I’ve been moderately persuaded towards the opponent’s side of gun control. It’s difficult to dictate what’s morally acceptable in today’s society with the increasing amounts of controversy, but noticing the dramatic increases in crime rate due to the lack in supply of guns, versus the dramatic decreases in crime rate because of an increase in the supply of guns, definitely proves the consequences of gun control to a certain degree. I would also have to agree that ridding the public from their firearms does take away the privilege of defending ourselves from any sort of crime. With the given results, knowing that our American citizens defend themselves from
Guns do not kill people, people do. The American Dream is being able to work towards and achieve whatever makes you happy, whether it be owning your own business, joining the military, or staying at home raising a family, but the only way to reach your dream is to do it without living in fear that your dream will be taken away. In the last couple years mass shootings and attacks on schools have sadly become a common tragedy. Those who have been victims of public shootings or any other life scarring event due to a criminal, along with anyone else who has watched the coverage of the tragedies on the news is somewhat living in fear, but if concealed carry laws were passed then living in fear would be significantly lowered along with crime rates. According to Mike Miller, author of What Happened to Chicago’s Murder Rate After Illinois Upheld Concealed Carry and Why it Matters, “three to four crimes are stopped by a handgun than are committed in the United States every year” (Miller). People would feel much safer knowing they would be able to defend themselves if the time ever arose. When we think or hear about guns most of us jump to the negative effects and stories we have heard. The only stories we hear about guns are how a person’s life has ended because of it, but we never hear how they save a person’s life. It is important to remember the commonly used phrase when talking about concealed carry, “Guns do not kill people, people do.” However, guns are an effective way of protection and states should not make stricter gun control laws because it is ineffective and creates additional problems in today’s violent society.
Take a look at the history of our country and the role guns have played in it. According to the second amendment gun ownership is perfectly legal and guaranteed as a right. There were and are good reasons for this, luckily they are still practiced today. Back in the day guns used to be for hunting and, on the occasion self defense. But when the colonists of this country had enough of British rule, they picked up there own personal guns and went to war and the British saw first hand how powerful the rough band of average American gun owners were. Our forefathers knew that the general population if armed would be key in winning the war. And it was.
“The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” The Second Amendment supports conceal and carry by stating “the right to bear arms.” That statement should be exemplified as to have a gun in public. People need to have a weapon ready for use in case of emergency. Not in a car or locked up inside a house, but in reach of the certified personnel. According to the opposing side on ProCon.org, the article Should Adults Have the Right to Carry a Concealed Handgun states: “the amendment is not unlimited and should permit weapons only to citizens who can prove a ‘justifiable need’” (“Right to Carry a Concealed Handgun” 3). The article also has a women’s opinion on Conceal and carry. She stated “women need to be able to defend their home and defend themselves if they go out. It 's just a safety issue” (“Right to Carry a Concealed Handgun” 2). In order to feel safe, and have a reliable self-defense mechanism should be a justifiable reason for Conceal and Carry
A counter to the argument in the pros paragraph would be "assault weapons bans did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level" and "states with restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons had higher gun-related murders" (Should, 1). Basically the pro side says that gun control will reduce gun deaths, the con side says the opposite that the even if gun control laws are put into play the number of deaths will actually increase. Another con the is presented is a counter to gun control laws helping make sure guns are used for self-defense. The con says that gun control laws will not prevent from criminals getting a hold of guns and using them to break laws. Research shows that “Of 62 mass shootings in the United States between 1982 and 2012, 49 of the shooters used legally obtained guns. Collectively, 143 guns were possessed by the killers with about 75% obtained legally” (Should, 1). Essentially statistics for gun control and against gun control go head to head from what has been
A New Jersey woman told police of how two men tried to open her front doors of her car at the same time. In the driver seat she reached for her gun, pulled it out and screamed. The two men fled the scene. “On Feb. 3, 1997 outside a bar in Mexico a female used a gun to stop a man from raping her" (Gale 88). A college park woman shot and killed an armed assailant who tried to car-jack her in her van with her 1 year old daughter inside. These and many other examples are of how and when handguns can save your life. Because people need handguns to protect themselves, the government should not place more restriction on them.
Research shows that guns are used much more often to prevent crimes then they are used to aid crimes. Therefore, laws that hinder the ordinary citizens right to self-defense with a fire arm tend to cause a net increase in crime. (Connell, Shaun) Gun control advocates want to take the most important necessity for safety away. People say it takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with the gun. This statement is very true, if a criminal with a gun comes to a movie theater to kill and the movie theater is a no gun zone. What do you do? There is nothing to do, that 's why gun control laws do not work to keep people safe. If there were no ban on handguns, then maybe you get a fighting chance for your life. Look at the recent Orlando shooting, 49 dead by one person. Your telling me if a couple of people in that club had handguns on them there would be a did rent outcome. Some pro-gun control advocates say that take guns away and the crime will stop, NOT TRUE! If you take guns away, it just puts more good people at risk because criminals will get the illegally like they already do. The safety of the people is what the government needs to focus on. Gun control acts are stupid because they are putting people at risk. I have known countless number of Samaritans that a gun has saved their life just pointing during a robbery or
Gun admirers have statistics that will prove their side on guns saving lives. According to one study by Lott “… for each additional year that laws allowing people to carry concealed handguns were on the books, robberies decli...
“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.
Nevertheless, guns are very dangerous and they are used in all sorts of criminal activities already. Therefore, the benefits of having a gun outweigh the drawbacks of not having a gun. No matter what each individual’s beliefs are in regard as to whether gun control should or should not be enforced, the Second Amendment of the Constitution gives each person the right to bear
... middle of paper ... ... Responsible citizens should have a right to carry a gun in order to protect themselves from those who obtain it illegally. All in all, responsible adults should have the right to carry a concealed handgun.