Ali Elkin writes in her article, “the Problem With Using Chicago to Make the Case Against Gun Control, “Chicago's high rates of gun violence have been well-documented. In 2014, there were 2,587 shooting victims in the city, according to the Chicago Tribune. The New York City Police Department recorded 1,381 victims in the same time period, and New York has around three times as many people as the Windy City.” It is obvious that Illinois has gone wrong somewhere with their gun laws because guns are not easily accessible. Elkin says that a lot of guns are accessed from outside the state. In fact, 60 percent of recovered guns from arrests were from out of state and twenty-four percent of all guns were from Indiana. This shows that people, especially …show more content…
In Elkin’s article, Richard Pearson says, “The gun laws in Chicago only restrict the law-abiding citizens and they’ve essentially made the citizens prey.” Unprotected citizens are essentially targets. John Lott says in his book More Guns Less Crime: Understanding Gun Control Laws, “One additional woman carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for women by about 3-4 times more than one additional man carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for men.” Men are able to defend themselves without a weapon more than women are. If guns were more accessible, than perhaps crime against women would go down and enhance safety for women and self-protection in …show more content…
This is especially true with Chicago’s large amounts of traffic that slow down police. Riddell talks about an older man who witnessed an armed robbery suspect running from the Chicago police. Due to the man having a concealed carry permit, he stopped the suspect so the police could get him. This is a prime example of how concealed carry is lowering crime. Some people say that if there are less gun laws then psychopaths and people under the influence will get guns. Although this is true, if more people have concealed carry there will be someone to stop that type of people. Elkin quotes from New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, “ ‘In many of the places around this country where they have the toughest gun laws, they have the highest violent crime rates. … Violence in America that's happened on our streets in our cities, like Chicago, up 19 percent, the murder rate," Christie said. "And you have some of the most aggressive gun laws in cities like that.’” Criminals know the places that they can attack successfully. Places like schools, movie theaters, and not to mention all the museums around the city are the perfect because the citizens are not armed and able to defend themselves; therefore, crime rates continue to skyrocket. If guns were more accessible, crime would go
Gun control is an important issue in the United States. The big issue with gun control is some people want stricter gun laws. On the other side of the argument people that supports the usage of a firearm thinks that it is an individual’s right under the Second Amendment and guns are needed for self-defense.
John R. Lott, Jr., PhD, author of More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws, stated, "States with the largest increases in gun ownership also have the largest drops in violent crimes... The effect on 'shall-issue ' [concealed gun] laws on these crimes [where two or more people were killed] has been dramatic. When states passed these laws, the number of multiple-victim shootings declined by 84 percent. Deaths from these shootings plummeted on average by 90 percent and injuries by 82
He demonstrates when guns are found in every household, gun control can do little to restrict access to guns from potential criminals. (McMahan, 3) So, McMahan’s main premises comes 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.
Some people think that states that allow citizens to carry guns only raises the crime rate in that state. Studies have actually shown that states that allow citizens to carry guns actually have a lower crime rate. States that allow citizens to carry guns have actually shown to lower murder rates from 5.6 killings per 100,000 people to 4.2.
Taking into account of the recent shooting sprees, the gun control debate has started again. However, people have contemplated: “Why does America need gun laws” and “Why are so many states disagreeing about the restrictions that need to be put in place for civilians looking to purchase firearms.” The reasoning for such contemplation is that the fluxuating strictness of gun laws have led to several incidences within states that have strict gun laws due to the fact that the perpetrators of these incidences have purchased their firearms either from black markets, or states where the severity of gun control is at minimal levels.
“States that passed ‘shall-issue’ laws between 1977 and 2010 had a 2% or more increase in the murder rate, and at least 9% increases in rates of rapes, aggravated assault, robbery, auto theft, burglary and larceny…,” (Source 5). Although guns possibly could promote more crime if they are allowed to be publicly transported, most criminals do not buy weapons legally, which requires a background check of the buyer before the dealer can sell the gun. Smart culprits usually buy guns illegally or know as the “black market”, which cannot be prevented by any constitutional law. Buying guns illegally is just as easy as buying illegal drugs, therefore, tightening gun laws will not affect the crime rate in the
“A handgun ban is not realistically enforceable. Confiscating guns would require house-to-house searches and alienate the very individuals whose compliance is essential to the success of any regulation. If gun ownership were prohibited, organized crime would step in to provide the firearms that will continue to be procured with criminal intent” (Done Kates). Over the past decade, the media has reported an increase in the severity of violent crimes as individuals have killed and hurt many others, including kids. Since 2006, there have been over 200 mass murders in the United States.
This is caused because the more guns there, are the less violence there is. Dangerous criminals will think twice about robbing someone that has a gun. A victim with a gun is no longer a victim because they can not fight back against the attacker. Therefore, they can save their lives and save lives of the public which need help at that moment. Lott states, “The estimated annual gain from 1992 from allowing concealed handguns was over $5.74 billion” (House Report). This states that when a decline in violence goes down the amount of money goes up. Concealed guns can only benefit everyone in multiple ways. Concealed weapons can help create the feeling of safety and reduce violence. No one wants to live in
Detroit and Chicago have some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the United States. Yet both of these cities have high crime and homicide rates. Criminals benefit from overly stringent gun control laws, because when the citizens are not armed, committing crimes without immediate punishment becomes significantly easier.
As of 2013, all 50 states allow concealed carry of handguns (Concealed Carry Reciprocity Maps), although a few states don’t require a permit and the standards for licensing vary greatly from state to state. In the U.S. most states are “Shall Issue” states. This means they will grant anybody a permit that meets certain guidelines such as being 21 or older and not having any felony convictions, a history of mental illness or domestic abuse. A handful of other states are “May Issue” states. In these other states, such as Maryland, a permit will only be issued if you can prove you need it. This can be a large obstacle and these states will usually only issue permits to people in the public eye, wealthy individuals that are well-connected or business owners frequently transporting large sums of cash (Concealed Carry Reciprocity Maps). Although the requirements and standards are different wherever you may live, one thing holds true- concealed carry permit holders are rapidly growing. The market for handgun training, concealed carry courses and smaller, more concealable handguns have opened up. When concealed carry was first gaining popularity there were two very different schools of thought. Some thought that violent crime would decrease, as criminals would fear the everyday person that just may happen to be armed. Others thought that having people carrying around concealed handguns in public would lead to an increase in violent crime with people losing their temper and shooting each other. When analyzing the data and crime trends, it is clear that with this influx of concealed carry permit holders there has not been a corresponding increase in violent crime.
Crime and guns. The two seem to go hand in hand with one another. But are the two really associated? Do guns necessarily lead to crime? And if so do laws placing restrictions on firearm ownership and use stop the crime or protect the citizens? These are the questions many citizens and lawmakers are asking themselves when setting about to create gun control laws. The debate over gun control, however, is nothing new. In 1924, Presidential Candidate, Robert La Follete said, “our choice is not merely to support or oppose gun control but to decide who can own which guns under what conditions.” Clearly this debate still goes on today and is the very reason for the formation of gun control laws.
If there weren’t any restrictions or regulations on gun control, our country would be in such better shape. Poverty stricken people struggling for food and shelter could just walk into a grocery store and leave with a cart full of food for free, just by pointing their gun at the cashier. That’s incredible, don’t you think? Another situation would be if you were to be pulled over for reckless driving. Just point your gun out the window at the police officer, and just like that, you’re off the hook. This could produce clean driving records, which could very likely lower insurance rates. Also, this would allow police officers to spend more time at the doughnut shop while also not spending as much on gas. That would mean that there would be more spending money in all of our pockets. With the current economic situation that Illinois is in, we could use all the help we can
Many gun supporters will say that more guns 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). Luik emphasizes that guns will not make any innocent people killers, it will make crime and death rates go down. They argue that the states with the lowest crime rates are the same states that have a higher gun ownership rate than any other state.
Many Americans are now applying for a license to carry licensed concealed arms with them. The rate at which licenses are being approved is worrying. This development is concerning law enforcement authorities. Putting so many firearms at the disposal of the public is counterproductive to the gains that are being made on improving security and especially in the cities where incidences of gun crime and violence are on the rise.
Frates, Chris. “The Gun Debate Isn’t Over Yet.” National Journal (2013): Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Web. 31 Oct. 2013.