Argumentative Essay On Gun Control

967 Words2 Pages

Gun Control The second amendment of the constitution states that “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”. In my opinion, this means that people have the right to own guns to form a militia to protect the nation or to be used in self-defense against a criminal. Furthermore, denying the public access to firearms for protection will only result in more crime, because the only real deterrent to criminal activity is encountering an armed victim that is ready to defend himself. I am opposed to any form of gun control because laws prohibiting the sale of firearms does not protect the general public and restrict liberty. …show more content…

If one person was able to protect themselves instead of being disarmed by the laws that were put into place to protect them, then the outcome of that shooting could have been completely different. Equally important is the fact that gun control does not stop crime. An example of this is in England. They had a gun ban go into effect in 1997. The reason for this gun ban was because in 1996, a suicidal mad man went into a preschool called Dunblane and in three minutes killed the teacher, 16 infants, and himself. The cry for a gun ban was heard around the countryside. Consequently, when it went into effect, there was an increase of firearm crime by roughly 40% because the criminals had to only fear the police that normally respond in five minutes. Although in America, the FBI 's crime statistics for all 3,054 U.S. counties found that gun ownership had been increasing across the country from 27.4 percent in 1988 to 37 per cent by 1996, and crime rates fell. More specifically, states with the greatest decrease in crime rates were those with the fastest increase in gun ownership (Luik, par.9). Looking at the Virginia tech shooting and the Dunblane massacre subjectively, we realize that there is no government policy that can stop crazy people from doing crazy …show more content…

According to a decision made by the Supreme Court in the case between District of Columbia ET AL. v. Heller, stated that an individual’s right to bear arms is protected by the second amendment and acknowledge that the Washington D.C. gun ban on handguns unconstitutional (Scalia, par.3). For over 30 years, it was a crime to have an assembled gun in your private residence in Washington D.C. Furthermore, during the Los Angeles riots of 1992, it was made perfectly clear that civilians had to defend for themselves because the chief of police said that he was not going to endanger the lives of his officers by sending them to disperse the riot. Armed civilian of little Korea were the most well-known example by firing into a crowd of rioters that were looting their business. Another example was in New Orleans when hurricane Katrina stuck. The police forcibly disarmed law-abiding citizens in an attempt to make New Orleans safe. Instead, they left hundreds unable to protect themselves and in the dark trying to defend what little food or water they had from

Open Document