Argumentative Essay: Gun-Free Zones

2459 Words5 Pages

Gun control is a highly engaged debated topic and always has been. Many people feel banning guns and creating gun free zones is the answer to stopping mass shooting and people being killed daily. Except they’re wrong. According to Freedom Outpost, 92 percent of mass shooting have occurred in gun free zones. Why? The answer is simple, bad guys know good people do not have guns to protect themselves. One argument that reoccurs is not the gun that kills, but the people who kill with a gun. "The world is filled with violence. Because criminals carry guns, we decent law-abiding citizens should also have guns. Otherwise they will win and the decent people will lose."- James Earl Jones. The second amendment from the United States Constitution reads, …show more content…

They claim they care about well-being of the people. The people need their weapons to defend themselves. The government says the only want to ban “assault weapons”. The term means a weapon capable of firing fully, semi-automatic, or three-round burst. Now yes the other two are already illegal, but the semi-automatic gun is not, at least not yet. Semi-automatic weapons are modern day sporting rifles and we are allowed to own that type of gun because if the state needed a militia, that would be our weapon of choice. During the argument of Piers Morgan and Ben Shapiro, they discussed the banning of guns. Morgan wanted to ban assault rifles while Shapiro exclaimed that hand-guns have killed more people than any other gun. Morgan rebutted with the question, “Which gun has been used in the mass shootings?” The answer is obviously the rifle. Once the rifle is banned, just like drugs, weapons will be smuggled in and still used. Serial numbers on the gun will be filed off and untraceable. At least with the rifles, someone can still prevent a mass shooting. Now if the rifle was banned, shot guns or hand guns will be used.

During the Columbine school massacre, two of the weapons used were an Intratec TEC-DC9 9-mm semi-automatic pistol and a sawed off 12gauge double barreled shotgun by Dylan Klebold. Both a hand gun and a pistol were used for a school shooting. Eric Harris used 10-shot …show more content…

The left claims they respect the second Amendment and civilians can own a handgun to protect themselves. This is contradictory. Obviously a mass shooter will use a rifle with large capacity magazine. Handguns are also used to kill people also. So the left is in support of the second amendment, yet the only want so called, “military style assault rifles”. Once again, the gun is called “military style”, the gun is not a military grade weapon. It resembles a military gun, but it is not a military gun. The purpose is it is a modern day sporting rifle, and used for the security of a free state. Hand guns have claimed more lives than any other gun. So we should ban a gun that has killed more people in a instance versus the number killer? “Fact: A decade long study, covering 84 mass public shootings, found that pistols were used 60% of the time. Rifles were used 27%.” http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/assault-weapons/#note-531-14 The left wants to know why anyone would need a drum magazine (10+ bullets). There was man in Greenwich Village, Massachusetts. He was beaten by a gang of seven with bats and tire irons. Not saying the man should’ve have shot the gangs, but let’s use a stepped up scenario. If the gang members all hand guns on them. This not hard to believe because this has happened. Then the man would need a more than a small capacity clip to defend himself. There are

Open Document