Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay about gun control in canada
Essay about gun control in canada
Essay about gun control in canada
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay about gun control in canada
Gun Control: Canada Versus the United States of America
How are the gun laws in Canada and the USA similar and different? In 2013 the number of deaths due to guns was nine times higher in the USA compared to in Canada; it is not like Canadians do not own guns. When it comes to citizens owning guns, Canadians rate number thirteen in the world whereas the USA rates number one. This number brings along with it massive shootings not only performed by adults but also by minors. This is something that should be taken care of in order to have a more effective precaution on protecting citizens. It is the time that the USA adopts the Canadian approach to gun laws if they want to reduce the massive shootings that have happened on previous occasions.
…show more content…
Whereas in the USA there is no federal license for gun owners. And interestingly enough there are more states that prohibit all gun registration than states that have a form of gun registration. Another difference is that in Canada one can only carry guns in public if it is part of one’s occupation or in the rare case protecting one’s life. Conversely, gun owners in the USA can carry guns legally if they are concealed and some states one can carry guns openly in public. Although the USA and Canada both carry out background checks before issuing guns Canada’s background check is much more thorough and this is partly due to Canada having a centralizes database that contains critical information from each province. Whereas in the USA the information the FBI provides often misses criminal and mental health information. Additionally, Canadians must take a safety course and pass a both, written and practical exam as a license and registration requirement. In the USA there is no mandatory course and …show more content…
There should be clearer laws with regards to what constitutes an acceptable storage device as this may decrease younger peoples’ access to guns in their homes. This could prevent massive shootings such as the Sandy Hook Elementary School, where a twenty-year-old accessed parents’ guns and killed twenty-six people and let two other people with major injuries. In the USA there needs to be a federal law that prohibits civilian use of semi-automatic firearms. Young people have access to these guns because they can either buy them or get them from their parents. There have been massive shootings in the USA where the main weapons used were one to three semi-automatic guns, used by young people. It may also be beneficial for the gun laws in the USA and Canada to be controlled by the federal government. Having the two-tiered system of firearms laws complicates things and may create confusion amongst civilians. A clear example is that in some states in the USA citizens are allowed to carry guns on school campuses and other places with large numbers of people.This makes massive shootings more probable by allowing people to take guns into public places where society is an easy target.
The research reveals that there are more similarities than differences. When comparing gun laws in Canada to that in the USA, and the gun laws in Canada are more strict than in the USA.
Guns in Canada will probably never be banned in Canada because it is not something that needs to be done. Sure the regulations regarding fire-arms can change here and there to make it safer for everyone but it would never be large enough to completely remove it. From it being are constitutional right to, and a way to make a living. Guns are way too valuable in this country to be removed because only more problems would arise from this happening. Is there really a point in fixing one problem only to make like several others? In conclusion fire-arms are far too important for the citizens in Canada thus meaning they should not be removed from this sacred country and the land of the “free”.
It is clear that the new firearms legislation is looking out only for the best interests of the citizens of Canada. Public safety and well-being undoubtedly takes precedence to a traditional gun culture. The argument by pro-gun advocates that licensing and registering firearms will turn them into criminals is invalid since guns have the potential to seriously injure and kill people and thus, should be treated with caution and special care.
Homicide is one of the worst crimes a person can commit. If you are found guilty by the court of law you can be sentenced to 10 years in prison, proving that it is an unjustifiable crime (justice.gc.ca). Homicide by definition is the killing of one human by another even without intent (dictionary.reference) and can be punishable as murder or manslaughter (World Book H 304). Personal firearms, mostly handguns, make the process of homicide easier and less scarring because instead of a gruesome stabbing; it is just a pull of a trigger. If Canadian citizens were allowed the easy access to personal firearms like US citizens, homicide rates would be much higher than what is it today. The United States of America in 2011 had an annual homicide total of 15,953. 75% of these homicides were done by a personal firearm. These numbers compared to Canada’s annual homicide total of 529, which only 173 involved personal firearms (32%) (gun policy)...
life . Is it our right to bear arms as North Americans ? Or is it privilege? And
Gun Ownership and Gun Control in Canada The Oscar-won documentary ‘Bowling for Columbine’ has aroused people’s awareness of gun ownership and gun control issues. Should gun ownership be banned or should guns be controlled? Does gun ownership create a violent society? The answer is not measurable, however, from the firearm situation between America and Canada, the answer is more obvious.
There are gun control laws to try and reduce the number of violent shootings that occur. They are trying to put limits on weapons that Americans can own. The government is trying to take our guns away mainly because of people that are criminally insane. Most of the people who commit crimes don’t even have the weapons legally. If the government takes away the rights of people who are allowed to have firearms in their possession, it will most definitely cause an outrage. Most people believe that the people should be more capable of maintain proper use of the firearms instead of having them all taken away. Taking the firearms from Americans away would cause a lot more problems than there actually are. The people will be upset with the government taking firearms away because of the horrible people who harm innocent people using them. So they will do anything to their capabilities to keep them.
Second, we should ban the possession of handguns, because the homicide and robbery rate in the U.S. is much greater than in Canada where there are stricter handgun laws. From 1987 to 1996, 52% of all homicides in the U.S. involved handguns while only 14% of all homicides in Canada involved handguns. Also, between 1987 and 1996, firearm homicide rates increased by 2% in the United States but decreased by 7% in Canada. Furthermore, handgun homicide rates in the U.S. are 15.3 times higher than in Canada. Finally, firearm robbery rates in the U.S. are 3.5 times higher than in Canada.
At present there are numerous regulations and restrictions on firearms imposed by the government. However there are no national mandated requirements or all encompassing legislation. The laws in place vary from state to state and are in some cases are poorly enforced. Hard evidence as to the effectiveness of these present regulations is ambiguous. The question as to how the government and society deals with gun control is unique to the USA. In a complex issue such as gun control both sides of the equation have valid arguments to be h...
Guns, Crime, and Freedom states that, no gun law which restricts the right of law-abiding citizens to own guns has been proven to reduce crime or homicides, not even the Brady Law and the “Clinton Crime Bill.” These two laws st...
There is an American consensus for some form of gun control. “…[F]irearms were involved in two-thirds of all murders in the United States and [t]he United States leads the world's richest nations in gun deaths…murders, suicides, and accidental deaths due to guns - according to a study published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the International Journal of Epidemiology” (Lepore). There might be some far extreme people who think that all guns should be banned but most sane Americans do not think that gun rights should be abolished. Americans regard self-defense as the most compelling reason to have a gun and twenty-two percent of households have handguns in the United States. However many people do think that gun control laws must be enacted and enforced. Pro-gun extremists and the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) must understand that there is a real for many people at the uncontrolled s...
43 of 50 states do not require permits in order for individuals to purchase guns. However, statistics show that these states have higher rates of firearm assaults (Pappas). In addition, proper background checks are not conducted on those making the purchase (Teen Vogue). This is significant because perpetrators look for the easiest way to let out their aggression, and complete the task efficiently. With a majority of states providing such easy access to this weapon, the main method of attack can easily be established. If the American Government improves this single factor, it is guaranteed that there will be improvement. In fact, this adjustment has been proved successful in Australia. In the 18 years before the Port Arthur tragedy of 1996, there were 13 gun massacres that occurred (Datz). The Government recognized that there was a fault in the system, and so, a mandatory buyback of all semi-automatic long guns was ordered. Alongside, laws regarding purchase of firearms were modified to be more effective (Datz). In the 20 years since then, there have been zero mass shootings. However, this is an action the American Government is unable to perform, resulting in more frequent reoccurrences. In conclusion, mass murders are rising, and will continue to rise, because of insufficient implementation of gun safety
The lawmakers of today make laws and they don’t think about the decisions they make from both perspectives. They may say it’s all right to own a handgun but they may have different intentions than the user has on how and why they need one. The owner may need one for their protection but the lawmaker may think it’s for hunting or something other than it causing violence. To ensure these guns are not being used for violence the law needs to make a set of rules and regulations on the conditions of guns. How to use them/abuse them need to be the number one law. It should state guns are not intended to be used for violence of no kind. The law need to enforce the laws they make to ensure proper safety it would eliminate half of the gun violence.
According to federal law, anyone has the right to possess handgun, and should be 21 years or above, which is clearly a crisp system that caused many crimes (Hodge, Vernick, & Webster, 2007). Therefore, the government should control the guns which will decrease the crime rate which will lead to reduce homicide number. After the Sandy Hook massacre, there were 99 school shootings, which can be defined as a massive number (Khan, 2015). If the government take seriously guns control, that would not happen, and people will be afraid to get a trouble of using guns. In addition, victims of guns shooting are increasing the United States. According to the Gun Violence Archive, "there were 12,569 gun deaths in the United States in 2014" (Khan, 2015, para. 8). Canada has a strict system for handguns, and the government has the right to ban some people to own guns. In fact, In 2004, the crime rate in Canada was 1.95 per persons, compared with a U.S rate of 5.9,this numbers show having gun control leads to decrease the crime rate (Hodge, Vernick, & Webster,
As for laws concerning the ownership and the purchasing of guns, depends on federal and state statutes. There are some laws in place in order to regulate any activity related to guns by the federal law. For example, The National Firearms Act which is in place to set a basic guideline for a gun registry managed by the Secretary of Treasury and the types of firearms permitted to own, and Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act a provision established to conduct background checks and a waiting period before obtaining a firearms. Although some states in the U.S. have more restricting gun laws than others, there are loopholes to these laws which can affect the overall levels of gun violence a state experiences. A considerable problem to differing
Canada has been in an intense debate on the topic of gun control for a very long time now. Arguments are thrown here and there and people are fighting for their own beliefs, whether that be that only the government should be allowed to own them or that anyone should have the freedom. One end of the spectrum always has good points to them, but there’s also the bad, and it’s the same with the other end. There have been a lot of concerns about it to the point that everyone seems to be arguing about it every single day. Topics such as who should be allowed to own them, when are they allowed to use them, and what type of gun and where to get them are crucial to discuss.