More handpicked essays just for you.
Good essays regarding gun control
Gun control control laws decrease crime rates essays
Essays that are for gun control
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Gun Control Law and Its Effectiveness
Since the development of firearms, human life has been threatened more than during the use of any weaponry. Crimes related to firearms like mass killing, assault and homicide are increasing at a tremendous rate. Keeping the safety of their citizens in mind, many nations have formulated gun control laws as a major part of their legislation. Just like other nations, United States have also passed out Second Amendment law declaring ‘right of the people to keep and bear Arms’ (Worsnop). Gun control laws illustrated by the second amendment make drastic changes in gun-related issues. Not only did it restrict the usage of highly dangerous assault rifles
…show more content…
and similar weapons, but also it enforces a registration process which distinguishes legal from illegal arms bearers. Although it’s been several years since gun control laws have been imposed, gun related crimes are still happening. So, there are lots of controversies over the effectiveness of gun control law. On one side, gun-control law advocates support their views toward its effectiveness on tracing criminals and reducing crime rates. Whereas on the other side, opponents of the gun control law, disrespect the opposing view, saying that it’s only waste of taxpayer’s money. However, any restrictions to gun control laws are disastrous over its advantages during implementation and the harmful repercussions at its blockade. Gun control advocates consider that the laws have controlled firearms which in turn reduce death and injuries.
Gun control advocate Susan Whitmore, Communications director for Handgun control Inc, states, “The lesson of the Brady law (3 days checkup process for a gun owner) and the assault weapons ban is that the American public wants more gun laws, not fewer” (Worsnop). In her opinion, gun laws have been more effective and they need to be broadened to restrict lethal weapon. Gun control expert groups agree the official law enforcement claiming those certain(banned) assault weapons, which should be outlawed. Don Cahill, national legislative chairman for the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) says that “he can understand someone from Utah or Wyoming complaining that this is not a problem, because it's not a problem in their states. But it's a problem in 75 percent of the rest of the country.” Without a federal assault-weapons law, he says, “we'll have the same problem we had prior to Brady. That is, if a person can't buy a gun in one state, he'll go to another state” (Worsnop). He presumes that proper gun laws in every state are essential to prevent easy access to criminals over unrecorded guns. Similarly, regulated laws for documented gun result decline in overall crime rate. Over the past 20 years, although, gun sales have absolutely exploded, homicides with firearms are down 39% during that time and other crimes with firearms have decreased by 69 %. And the overall crime ratio throughout the decade has drastically changed. Since reaching a peak of 10.2 reported murders per 100,000 people in 1980, the rate steadily declined during the next 20 years, plateaued through 2007, then dropped to 4.7 in 2011 (Mantel 237). So, legalization of gun control laws was effective in declining violence and
crime. Gun law opponents often raise questions over the issue of national debt for legalizing gun control laws. Recording owner info, certifying guns, banning high machine guns and tracing them, and all other process to regulate the gun laws needs billion-dollar funds. But gun control proponents often disregard concern over economical aspect of nation saying that law has utilizing money in another way. Regarding this issue, Daniel W. Webster, director of violence research at the Washington (D.C.) Hospital Center, and several colleagues claims that “Transferring the costs of gun injuries back to the gun industry through product-liability litigation is not only just, but should also act to reduce the number of gun casualties” (Worsnop). Although the legalization of gun laws cost high amount for nation, indirectly in acts as reducing agent to minimize the loss of national economy over the victims of gun related crimes. People are often ambiguous about the effect of wider availability of handguns for providing public safety. Regarding safety of public health, gun control advocates argue that limiting access to firearms will reduce gun-related crimes and accidental shootings, which ultimately results in better public safety. They feel that firearms themselves are the key to worry. According to Thomas Sowell, Senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, “Many gun control advocates have cited the much higher murder rates in the United States than in England as due to tighter gun control laws in England” (Sowell 6). But Malcolm's study points out that the murder rate in New York has been some multiple of the murder rate in London for two centuries - and, during most of that time, neither city had serious restrictions on gun ownership. As late as 1954, "there were no controls on shotguns" in England, Malcolm reported, but only 12 cases of armed robbery in London. Of these only 4 had real guns. But in the remainder of the 20th century, gun control laws became ever more severe - and armed robberies in London soared to 1,400 by 1974." As the numbers of legal firearms have dwindled, the numbers of armed crimes have risen" is her summary of that history in England. Conversely, in the United States the number of handguns in American homes more than doubled between 1973 and 1992, while the murder rate went down (Sowell 9). This evidence supports the gun law advocates of US with an outstanding result in overcoming crimes rate and they desire even more severe laws. On the other side, gun control opponents vowed not to allow lawmakers to frame such laws and discouraged the idea that restrictions will keep weapons away from criminals. They believe the problem with gun-related violence rests with the person holding the gun. As the National Rifle Association (NRA) puts it, “Guns Don't Kill People -- People Do.” The crimes depend on human nature and their environmental background, rather than owning guns. What the study demonstrated, says Glary Kleck (a professor at the College of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Florida State University), is that “people who live in dangerous circumstances are more likely to acquire a gun in response to those circumstances. One of the reasons they got a gun in the first place was because they anticipated being a victim of some kind of violence” (Worsnop). He explained that the reason to make the accessibility of guns easier is not for the use of criminals but specifically for the commoners for their safety. Moreover, he clarifies that victims who use guns are less likely to be injured or lose property. Since Kleck considers the proposed assault weapons ban “a nothing piece of legislation,” he doesn't think its approval by the House says anything about the NRA's influence with Congress. “The only really quantifiable indicator of NRA strength is its membership,” says Kleck. “And membership has been growing, not declining. The NRA now has 3.3 million members, each paying $25 or more a year (Handgun Control claims about 1 million members)” (Worsnop). Mentioning those facts, Kleck notes that the gun control law is at the state level, not at the federal level and it requires a lot of money for regulating the gun law in all states. All in all, although gun control opponents often question the effectiveness of gun control laws through various statistics and slogans, the harm it provides after its restriction is far more threatening than legalizing the laws. It seems that a country which has more severe gun control legislation has fewer crime rate than other nations without any gun control laws. Registered gun with a tracking device on it, help to mitigate misuse of guns, and it also serve as an evidence to provide justice. So, proper implementation of gun control laws is only the best choice for stopping gun related crimes, which could ultimately lead to create a safer atmosphere all around the nations.
A growing number of publicized tragedies caused by gun violence have caused a great stir in the American community. Recently, President Barack Obama has made proposals to tighten the regulation of and the restrictions on the possession of weapons in America to lessen these tragedies. Should the legislative branch decide in favor of his proposals, all American citizens who do or wish to own the type of weapons in question or who use current loopholes in existing policy would be directly affected. His proposals, which are to “require background checks for all gun sales, strengthen the background check system for gun sales, pass a new, stronger ban on assault weapons, limit ammunition magazines to 10 rounds, finish the job of getting armor-piercing bullets off the streets, give law enforcement additional tools to prevent and prosecute gun crime, end the freeze on gun violence research, make our schools safer with new resource officers and counselors, better emergency response plans, and more nurturing school climates, [and] ensure quality coverage of mental health treatment, particularly for young people,” have been cause for a large amount of recent debate (whitehouse.gov).
The United State of America, established by the Founding Father who lead the American Revolution, accomplished many hardship in order to construct what America is today. As history established America’s future, the suffering the United State encountered through history illustrate America’s ability to identify mistakes and make changes to prevent the predictable. The 2nd Amendment was written by the Founding Father who had their rights to bear arms revoked when they believe rising up to their government was appropriate. The Twentieth Century, American’s are divided on the 2nd Amendment rights, “The right to bear arms.” To understand why the Founding Father written this Amendment, investigating the histories and current measures may help the American people gain a better understanding of gun’s rights in today’s America.
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
Opposing sides have for years fought over the laws that govern firearms. For the purposes of this paper "Gun Control" is defined as policies enacted by the government that limit the legal rights of gun owners to own, carry, or use firearms, with the intent of reducing gun crimes such as murder, armed robbery, aggravated rape, and the like. So defined, gun control understandably brings favorable responses from some, and angry objections from others. The gun control debate is generally publicized because of the efforts of the Pro-Gun Lobby or the Anti-Gun Lobby.
As violence and murder rates escalate in America so does the issue of gun control. The consequence of this tragedy births volatile political discourse about gun control and the Second Amendment. The crux of the question is what the founding fathers meant when they wrote, “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Since the writing of the Second Amendment the make and model of firearms has changed dramatically and so has the philosophies of the people. A rifle is no longer defined as a single shot, muzzle-loading musket used to primarily protect families or solely for food. Should the weapons we use today be protected by an amendment written nearly 222 years ago? Should the second amendment be rewritten? Does the Second Amendment apply to individual citizens? These questions spark extensive debates in Washington D.C. regarding what the founding fathers intended the amendment to be. The answer to this question lies in the fact that despite hundreds of gun control articles having been written , still the gun control issue remains unresolved. History tells us gun control debates will be in a stalemate until our judicial system defines or rewrites the Second Amend. This paper will examine the history of the Second Amendment, and attempt to define the framers intent, gun control legislation and look at factors that affect Americans on this specific issue...
America is the most well armed nation in the world, with American citizens owning about 270 million of the world’s 875 million firearms (Marshall). Indeed, this is more than a quarter of the world’s registered firearms. The reason why Americans own so many guns is because of the Second Amendment, which states, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” (Rauch) This amendment guarantees U.S. citizens the right to have firearms. Since this amendment is relatively vague, it is up for interpretation, and is often used by gun advocates to argue for lenient gun laws. Hence, gun control is a frequently discussed controversial topic in American politics.
“A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” The right of all Americans to bear arms is a right the Founding Fathers held to equal importance as the Constitution itself. Gun control laws directly violate this right and therefore should not even be under consideration. Even if that issue is overlooked, gun control advocates state that in order to reduce firearm related violence, gun control laws must be implemented to remove the violence caused by firearms. Although this may seem reasonable, the consequences of such laws are ironically counterproductive; they exacerbate the problem instead of fixing it. Besides the fact that the American Constitution guarantees its citizens the right to bear arms, the idea of restricting gun ownership in order to reduce firearm-related violence would ultimately fail given the previous experiments of gun control in England and in numerous states.
Today in this day and age the world is filled with hate and violence and other terrible things. People use weapons and other objects to cause terror on others for many reasons such as power and wealth. Firearms are one of the weapons someone may use to harm or rule over others because of the danger the weapon can cause. Over the years with gun violence and killings, some people want to get rid of the citizens right to purchase and own firearms. Although gun violence bad, by taking a person’s right to bear arms will not solve the problem with gun violence in todays society.
The 2nd amendment “The Right to Bear Arms” has not been brought up to date in over 200 hundred years and it is time that we make the necessary adjustments. Handguns and assault weapons are to blame for many mass killings in America. Each year, more than 30,000 people die in the United States in firearm-related incidents. Handguns and semi automatic weapons have been used in these massacres. The choice of rules such as exercising the right to further background checks and limit the availability of automatic weapons should be the first and foremost concern of both federal and state legislators.
The conversation of gun control and gun regulation has been a great debate over the decades. NRA Executive vice president Wayne LaPierre, in his speech on Newtown Shooting that occurred on December 21st, 2012, addresses the topic of gun control and argues that guns are not the cause of gun violence. LaPierre's project is to instead of gun control and decreasing the numbers of guns, increase the numbers of guns to solve the problem of gun violence. On the other side of debate, an American journalist, Nicholas Kristof, in his journal, "Do We Have the Courage to Stop This?" argues that guns are the cause of gun violence, but they should not be banned. Kristof's project is to regulate guns with many cautions. While these two authors have different arguments and projects, they use similar strategies to advance their claims. This paper will focus on the way each author strategically uses compare and contrast, cause and effect, and problem-solution to advance their claims and how effective these strategies are used.
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...
They believe that if background checks were required for private sales, which they describe as “firearms sold at gun shows, through classified newspaper ads, the Internet, and between individuals virtually anywhere” then the “Gun Show Loophole” would be eliminated (Coalition to Stop Gun Violence). As evidenced by the call for an increase in gun control after mass shootings, people believe that with stricter gun control, we would have less incidences of gun violence. Gun control advocates argue that if we have stricter gun control, then we will have a safer country, with fewer shootings. According to a study done by the University of Wisconsin and Bowling Green State University between 2005-2007, the number of police officers who “were convicted of firearms violations” was convicted “at a.0002% annual rate” (Fund).
Gun violence in America is a public health crisis, which needs to be recognized and changed by legislatures, and the voting American. As conscious Americans, we need to vote for changes to gun laws that would improve background checks nation-wide, make firearm registration mandatory, restrict the sale of assault weapons and weapon modifications that give the shooter military-grade fire power, and invest in gun-safe technology and safe firearms storage designs. This type of technology will help prevent criminally oriented people from accessing guns, and will help prevent the accidental deaths of many children by guns. This essay will explain the reforms needed to help ensure Americans can still exercise their 2nd amendment right of owning firearms, and preventing the unnecessary deaths of many Americans at the same time.
The United States holds five percent of the world’s population, yet thirty-one percent of the world’s public mass shootings (Christensen). Yes, legislation for stricter gun laws is discussed after each devastating shooting; however, the Second Amendment prevents any effective legislation from being passed. Eventually, the talk of new laws diminishes, leaving the number of mass shootings in America tremendously high. Because of the right to bear arms, gun laws remain loose, and American citizens continue to be murdered; therefore, Congress needs to amend the Second Amendment to restrict the right to bear arms and enable stricter gun laws to be passed.
The topic of gun control is a reoccurring issue to be debated about in the United States. According to different groups of people, there are various opinions about this topic. The safest resolution would be to place stricter laws while attempting to possess a weapon. Crime is inevitable; however, the amount of casualties can be reduced.