The following argument is in favor of gun control. The restrictions on guns in place today are not nearly sufficient considering the level of gun violence seen on a daily basis. In the article “Stronger Gun Control Laws Will Save Lives” it is stated, “The fact is that very few federal laws regulate the manufacture, sale or possession of firearms, and those currently on the books are filled with loopholes or significantly tie the hands of law enforcement.” Arming citizens would not reduce crime or allow for self-defense, it would merely place guns into the wrong hands of people who are not trained enough or mentally stable to handle them. This is why there are so many school shootings and public massacres on television constantly broadcasted …show more content…
It is widely known and accepted by those in favor and against gun control that the Second Amendment in the Constitution clearly states an individual’s right to own guns. This was established by the founding fathers as a means for citizens to defend themselves against violence and/or tyranny. While some may argue this is an antiquated and unnecessary law, the Supreme Court has also sustained this amendment today as constitutional and adequate. Every law-abiding citizen has the right to feel protected against those who pose a threat to their safety. As stated in the article by Trevor Burrus “Face It: Guns Are Here to Stay”, “Even if the government enacted a massive program to confiscate these weapons, the feds would fail in their task and frighten millions of Americans in the process.” Gun laws simply penalize and restrict honest citizens while criminals continue to find ways and loopholes to arm themselves. Gun laws currently established serve their purpose rather poorly as criminals unceasingly buy guns even after they are said to be forbidden. History serves as a clear example of how guns protect the rights and liberties of individuals as it was private guns that aided colonists in fighting the British and gaining America’s
The topic of gun control and firearm regulation has been subject to heated debate for a long while. Both sides have potent arguments, however the core of this issue ultimately boils down to the constitution itself. More specifically the second amendment. This argument quickly becomes quite complicated because gun control and firearm regulation concerns not only the right of citizens, but more importantly the safety of citizens. The second amendment helps to guarantee an imperative right belonging to all citizens.
Im assuming that no one in here will ever go out and commit a violent crime involving a firearm. However i cant guarantee that some people we are around everyday will not be involved in a violent crime. I'd like to tell you today why gun control should not be put into large scale effect . I'd like to bring up the number of violent crimes involving firearms in the united states in the year of 2013 before the bulk of the gun control movement had started (refer to chart). IN the year 2013 there were 16,121 homicides nation wide and out of that number 11,208 of them were caused by a firearm of those deaths approximately 750 of the murders were committed with an illegally owned firearm which shows that you do not have to be a felon that is unable to possess a firearm in order to take someones life with one.
Gun control is in the forefront of the national new stemming from the mass shootings at schools and public places across the United States. Concerns have been raised both by the public and our nation’s government about gun violence and creating more strict legislation. One of the measures looked at is the use of smart technologies to make guns safer. This call for smart technologies to be incorporated into firearms has a lack of consensus on both sides of the gun control issue making smart technologies a slowly researched and developed area. For this reason, smart gun technologies should not be incorporated into gun control legislation.
The recent Nashville shooting has added to the ongoing debate about gun regulation in the United States. This tragic event has once again highlighted the contentious issue of gun control, which has involved politicians, gun rights activists, and the public in a heated dispute for years. The question of balancing individual rights and public safety is still being debated, and despite the efforts of lawmakers to find solutions, mass shootings and gun violence continue to occur at an alarming rate. The Nashville shooting serves as a reminder of the urgent need for productive discussions to address this critical issue and to prevent future tragedies. While news outlets have differing opinions on existing gun regulations, a question remains on whether
If it is illegal to own a gun, a criminal will not follow the law and he will have a gun. But regular citizens won’t, meaning that the criminal will be more drawn to steal or harm someone. Making guns illegal will only increase the crime rates in America, not decrease them.
Another, law could be to implement mental health screenings to detect any mental illnesses with the future gun holder, that would be most useful, because it is essential to know the mental state of a future gun holder. Lastly, regulating illegal gun sales would also help, along with gun safety and protection. In today’s society, there are gun laws and specific things that must be done, to be able to own a handgun or assault rifle. For example, there is an age limit that differs in some states, those age limits are eighteen years old in some states and twenty-one in other states.
A weapon in the wrongs hands is the maximum danger humanity can face. Nowadays, violence and delinquency in society are viewed as the maximum problem solver. Humanity is full of chaos; hate and envy seize our souls. Guns are the ultimate security for some citizens but for others, these add to a feeling of defenselessness. Throughout history, any topic related to guns means a plethora of problems.
Strict regulations and limitations have been pursued already and clearly do not suffice. Statics brought to attention by gun control opponents, show that gun control laws have done little to reduce crime rates. Several restrictions have been made on certain guns, considered as overly dangerous, though in the hands of an unstable criminal even a legal hunting gun can be deadly. Countless restrictions have been made, however people have still found ways around them. If people are unstable and determined enough, they will find a gun, regardless of the restrictions or regulations.
Guns are a cost-benefit ratio along with everything else in this world. Guns don’t fire by themselves, so why do we need to outlaw guns when the gun doesn’t pull its own trigger? Instead, we need to work with the people using them. Gun laws are to keep people that aren’t supposed to have guns from getting guns and they are also in place to protect the people who have guns and give them the right to bear arms. Studies show that gun ownership has increased incredibly while at the same time crime has decreased to historic lows The second amendment says people have the right to bear arms and they can’t be taken away.
Gun Control Gun control has become a polarizing and controversial issue around the globe. There have been many reported issues of mass shootings both in schools and in the public, making it a hot button issue. Proponents argue that, if the government strictly controls the ownership of guns, such tragedies can be prevented. Most Americans have an obsession with guns because the law allows them to do so. Therefore, they are always ready to scoff at anyone trying to control gun ownership.
Gun control also limits our constitutionally derived right to own firearms. If gun control is enforced, law-abiding citizens will be forced to give up their guns and their right to own guns, while many criminals who own guns may illegally keep theirs. As the saying goes “If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” Guns are an important aspect of our society in many ways. They allow for protection, recreation, and hunting.
Guns are just a tool, like knives and hammers and it completely depends on the people on how they use it. People who support guns and arms say that the Second Amendment secures individual’s right to carry guns with them and that gun rights is needed for self-protection, and was intended for military to have peace and defend the country if needed (Spitzer, 70). Most of the Americans use guns as a source to protect themselves and they believe that gun ownership prevents crime. A study conducted on November 26, 2013 showed that bans on weapons did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level (Lane, 5). Moreover, even if the rules and regulations are executed on gun control, not all criminals obey the law.
Gun laws give too much power to the government and way less from the people, which will lead to government corruption. And, stated by ClearPictureOnline.com,”Guns don 't kill people, people do. We need to concentrate on the values and morals of our citizens and at the role the media plays in glorifying violence and the lack of respect for law.” (Shootout: Do We Need More Gun Control Regulations?) What people don 't understand is that they are taking away their own freedoms with Gun Control.
While denying people their rights to own guns can be taken as a harm, as this is supposed to be offset by the greater reduction in harms to the potential victims of guns (or people with guns). And so, I do accept that gun control laws can be justified morally, reason because of the utilitarian point of view. Nevertheless, a question is still asked to what extent guns
To begin with, the second amendment of the US constitution gives citizens the right to carry or possess a gun. As a result, gun violence in America has increased drastically over the years due to guns being utilised in a reprehensible manner and people getting wedged in the crossfire, hence why stringent law enforcements need to be put in place regarding guns in the US. “Since 1982, there have been at least 61 mass murders carried out with firearms; in most cases, the killers had obtained their weapons legally”.