Many people think that banning guns entirely would solve all the gun related crimes in America. It will not. Many of the guns used for illegal activities are not obtained through the lawful way. The gun manufactures do not keep their merchandise under any true security. Many people also claim that guns have saved them from assaults because the gun makes for a great deterrent. Guns that are used lawfully are not only used for protection, people also use them as a means of entertainment or for food. This does not mean that everyone should just get a gun if they wish to, though. Obviously, people will use them for the wrong reasons.
The easiest way to get a gun cheap is illegally, so why would banning guns outright stop the problem? These guns can be obtained very easily. Twenty-five percent of Los Angles high-schoolers say they could easily get a gun for less than fifty dollars (Hot Guns). If these teenagers can get these guns so easily without a permit how easy would a real full time criminal have to try to obtain a firearm?
Not only can this information explain how easy firearms are to obtain, the criminals themselves are boasting about how easy it was to come to posses the firearm. In fact fifty-five percent claimed that their weapon was easy to obtain (Hot Guns). According to Special Agent Daryl McCarary, “It’s easier, in some cases, to buy a gun illegally than a drink of alcohol or marijuana (Hot Guns).” Since criminals are confessing how easy it is to get a gun we know now that there is more to the story than just irresponsible licensed gun dealers. Investigators must then look elsewhere for a trail of guns that “seems to com form nowhere (Hot Guns).”
These “ghost trails” have many probable sources. Most o...
... middle of paper ...
...gresti). There was also an idea for a “smart gun”. These guns would only fire for certain, predetermined users. Lots of money has been given to various gun manufactures to develop this safety feature. This does seem like a very good idea but it would and has cost lots of money and it can easily be removed (Fabsik). The ideas for an ID lock gun and a background are very good, but must be improved. The Brady bill would probably be much more affective if the program was automated and the ID lock guns need much improvement.
Now, it is extremely easy for criminals to get guns at too cheap of prices, but if this problem could be fixed, guns would not have such a bad reputation. People would see them as a piece of armor, not a spear. And the many people who use them in their daily lives to entertain themselves would not be automatically thought of as criminal.
First of all, gun control punishes only innocent citizens, not the dangerous felons. Criminals wanting to purchase a gun can easily obtain a pistol illegally from the black market, so gun control is practically useless to the unsafe villains who threaten public safety. Statistics show that in the U.S, 645,000 times in each year, innocent people ...
Even if guns were completely banned from the U.S.A., people would still find a way to get them. Criminals would get guns. They would have their way, and there would be nothing we could do about it. We have no way to defend ourselves. What is gun control to you?
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.
middle of paper ... ... law system, however not all illegal applicants can! Some politicians strongly support bans on gun uses will solve the firearm problems more effectively. Significantly, bans on guns will indeed raise the demand for illegal guns underground, which makes it harder for police to control gun uses. i.e. a FAC gun control system in Canada works very effectively due to the fact that fewer guns are traded in black market.
When looking at all of the important issues of today’s society, one of the most neglected issues revolves around guns. Guns serve two different purposes: to defend and to kill. Even though I’ve been on this Earth for only 21 years, I’ve become keen and have taken an interest in the study of guns and how they pose more problems in society than any other issue. My interest all started around the time of the Columbine shooting in Colorado and how society has taken steps since that point in history. Going back to the two different purposes, both have been used to help explain the differences in the distinctions of different gun related events that continue to occur, such as mass shootings. Problem analysis, as stated, will help to explain how guns can be seen differently from each individual and what can be gained or lost from a deep analysis.
Right now the government has limited firearm purchasing only to people who pass certain steps. Gun control has risen as a controversial subject in the United States today. Many say gun control or banning of all firearms will help protect and make our country a better place. Reasons many are wanting to ban firearms are that the 2nd amendment is out dated and unjustified in this date and time. Writer Eugene Robinson states that “farmers wrote of “arms,” thinking about muskets and single shot pistols. They could not have foreseen modern rifles or high-capacity magazines.” Many agree with Mr. Robinson saying that back when the constitution was written they couldn’t have understood what was going to come in the future. Citizens also believe people have no reason to fight against intruders that come in their home that’s what the authorities are for. If people what to defend themselves why waste the money and time on having police? In this day and age why have weapons why not cut out all firearms and just be one happy country, it’s that simple, but is it really that simple? (“Assault Weapons Must Be Banned in
Gun control and gun banning have been a highly controversial issue since all the gun crimes hitting the news in America. Crimes like Sandy-Hook , Aurora , San Berdindno , and Oregon have lawmakers thinking about banning guns by enacting laws that allows them to. Lawmakers believe guns are the prime suspect in all these gun violence crimes and they believe it well reduce murder and violence. Banning guns well do nothing to reduce the mass killings. If a criminal has the intent to commit a crime nothing can stop them. Also a criminal doesn’t abide by the law that is why they are criminals. Gun banning would only disarm the legal law abiding citizen leaving them defenseless. Also the right to bear arms is guaranteed by the Constution and the Bill of Rights. If lawmakers have the courage take away one Constutional right they will have the courage to keep going, I have three logical reasons why gun banning well not work.
“It’s not gun control we need, it’s sin control” (Si Robertson). The government can’t control what people do with their firearms or who has them in their possession. Gun control does not decrease crime. With or without guns people will still find ways to harm others and even with a gun ban people will still find away to either make or buy a gun illegally. With a gun control law in place there is no good way for citizens to protect themselves. Even though some may say it that it will stop some of the crime, there are many reasons that prove that gun control doesn't decrease crime.
Gun control was brought into play to protect citizens from criminals and lunatics who shouldn't have guns in the first place. But only 27 percent of the criminals who are in prison for crimes involving guns have obtained them legally (Henderson 23). If criminals can find guns illegally now, how is more gun control going to stop them from getting them later? Groups against gun control,the most dominant being the NRA (National Rifle Association), are afraid gun control is the first step in outlawing guns.
Several people postulate that handguns should be banned because they believe that the weapon is the genuine cause of any harm done. These people also argue that banning handguns has lowered the crime rate in a multitude of countries, therefore it would benefit the united states. Due to the fact that minorities are less likely to own a handgun, there if the belief that banning handguns may also stop the death of minorities in America. However, handguns should be available with certain precursors because the blame shouldn’t be put onto the weapon, and owning a gun is a second amendment right in the constitution.
The Reasons for the government attempting to ban the vast majority of firearms comes from all the violence that is caused using them. The government’s aim is to make a safer environment for the people. That is a reasonable goal, but most crimes are dealt using illegal firearms. Banning firearms most likely wouldn't cause much of a decline in gun related crime. Majority of the crimes are done by people who have had a prior past of criminal activity. Guns are not the reason for the violent crimes. The crimes are caused by the typical person with a violent past with them. Most people would agree that the firearms they have are used either for recreational activities or home protection in times of need. So they believe that without firearms, they are defenseless. Most will also tell anybody that the weapons aren't the ones causing the harm.
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
For years proposals for gun control and the ownership of firearms have been among the most controversial issues in modern American politics. The public debate over guns in the United States is often seen as having two side. Some people passionately assert that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own guns while others assert that the Second Amendment does no more than protect the right of states to maintain militias. There are many people who insist that the Constitution is a "living document" and that circumstances have changed in regard to an individual’s right to bear arms that the Second Amendment upholds. The Constitution is not a document of total clarity and the Second Amendment is perhaps one of the worst drafted of all its amendments and has left many Americans divided over the true intent.
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. 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.
The problem with guns is fairly obvious: they decrease the difficulty of killing or injuring a person. In Jeffrey A. Roth's Firearms and Violence (NIJ Research in Brief, February 1994), he points out the obvious dangers. About 60 percent of all murder victims in the United States in 1989 (about 12,000 people) were killed with firearms. Firearm attacks injured another 70,000 victims, some of whom were left permanently disabled. In 1985, the cost of shootings was an estimated $14 billion nationwide for medical care, long-term disability, and premature death. In robberies and assaults, victims are far more likely to die when the perpetrator is armed with a gun than when he or she has another weapon or is unarmed.