Argumentative Essay On Gun Control

The term gun control is one that leaves many people divided on political lines. What if I told you it is not a matter of whether or not we should implement it, but instead, a matter of weighing the desirability of gun control implementation? In other words, can we implement gun control in a way that it does not impede on the rights of the 2nd Amendment but ensures that guns do not enter the hands of the wrong people? After several observations, it is obvious that the answer to this question is no. Therefore, the United States should not opt for stricter gun control policies.
The first observation: stricter gun control laws could prove to be ineffective against keeping guns out of the wrong hands. Gun control laws will not prevent criminals from obtaining guns and breaking laws. John R. Lott, Jr., PhD, gun rights activist, stated, "The problem with such [gun control] laws is that they take away guns from law-abiding citizens, while would-be criminals ignore them." This statement is a core issue as to why gun control laws are not readily accepted by many gun owners. The possibility of being left defenseless against criminals with access to a network of illegal guns is terrifying. This loophole is clearly evident when “37.4%” of state prison inmates

who "used, carried, or possessed a firearm when they committed the crime for which they were serving a prison sentence" obtained their firearms from ‘a friend’ (Bureau of Justice Statistics May 2013).
The second observation: the United States has tried similar things in the past and they have failed. History shows that when the United States tries to mandate stricter policies on personal liberties, it backfires. For instance, in 1919, the 18th Amendment was passed as a means for the United States to crack down on alcohol consumption. It proved to be highly ineffective, for people found ways to illegally obtain alcohol. Crime lords like the notorious Al Capone sprung up in power as a consequence. In another instance, before the groundbreaking Roe v. Wade, abortion was outlawed in many parts of the United States. Because of this many women were illegally getting very dangerous black market abortion operations. However after abortion was legalized, illegal abortion numbers decreased drastically. These examples in history only raise the question, if the United States opted for stricter gun control laws, who can wholeheartedly say the illegal circulation of guns won’t drastically increase? History shows that when legal force was used to prohibit personal liberties, the consequences were dire.
The final observation: the Second Amendment protects individual gun ownership.

As stated in the Second Amendment of the US Constitution, "[…] the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Gun ownership is an American tradition older than the country itself and is protected by the Second Amendment; more gun control laws would infringe upon the right to bear arms. "The Founders understood that the right to own and bear laws is as fundamental and as essential to maintaining liberty as are the rights of free speech, a free press, freedom of religion and the other protections against government encroachments on liberty delineated in the Bill of Rights"( Lawrence Hunter, Chairman of Revolution

PAC).
One cannot help but wonder why there is suddenly such hysteria over gun usage in the United States. The main argument for this hysteria is usually “oh we need to stop mass shootings that kill people.” That is a very valid reason for hysteria, however why isn’t there such a mass call for people’s health? Why aren’t there laws that restrict the types of –cancer causing, diabetes causing, hormone changing, stroke inducing, high blood pressure promoting- foods that are approved by the FDA and circulating the food market? They certainly cause more deaths and disease in the United States than guns do. In actuality, relatively few people are killed by guns. According to the CDC's "Leading Causes of Death Reports," between 1999 and 2013, Americans were 21.5 times more likely to die of heart disease (9,691,733 deaths); 18.7 times more likely to die of malignant tumors (8,458,868 deaths); 2.4 times more likely to die of diabetes and 2.3 times more likely to die of Alzheimer's (1,080,298 and 1,053,207 respectively) than to die from a firearm (whether by accident, homicide, or suicide). [4] The flu and related pneumonia (875,143 deaths); traffic accidents (594,280 deaths); and poisoning whether via accident, homicide, or suicide (475,907 deaths) all killed more people between 1999 and 2013 than firearms. [4] Firearms were the 12th leading cause of deaths for all deaths between 1999 and 2013, responsible for 1.3% of deaths with 464,033 deaths.
The mass hysteria over guns can be accredited to news outlets that use their power of agenda setting to exaggerate the need for stricter gun control laws. As discussed throughout this piece, stricter gun control laws cannot be enforced because they cannot ensure that guns will stay out of criminal hands. Moreover they cannot ensure that the 2nd amendment will not be infringed upon. I encourage the reader of this piece to research without bias, both arguments pertaining to gun control and formulate your own well sounded opinion on the matter, just as I have.