A New Jersey woman told police of how two men tried to open her front doors of her car at the same time. In the driver seat she reached for her gun, pulled it out and screamed. The two men fled the scene. “On Feb. 3, 1997 outside a bar in Mexico a female used a gun to stop a man from raping her" (Gale 88). A college park woman shot and killed an armed assailant who tried to car-jack her in her van with her 1 year old daughter inside. These and many other examples are of how and when handguns can save your life. Because people need handguns to protect themselves, the government should not place more restriction on them. Gun control laws are getting stricter and stricter as time goes on. The first gun control law was “passed by Congress in 1927 when it outlawed the mailing of firearms" (Thomas16). This law meant that all concealable firearms could not be shipped through the mail. The reason why was guns were able to be bought and traded through the post office. suddenly there was a consontration on gun control this was due to the fact that "after the assassination attempt on FDR’s life the major concern of gun control was brought up" (Thomas 15). Because many American’s didn’t want criminals to be allowed to purchase guns, gun laws got stricter. This led to the firearms act of 1934. "The firearms act of 1934 imposed a $200 tax on full autos and sawed-off shotguns. These laws also made people go through FBI background checks to obtain these weapons" (Thomas 16). Full autos are firearms that will continue to fire as long as the trigger is held down. Sawed-off shot guns are shot guns that have extremely short barrels allowing them to be concealed. In the 1960s there was another increase in gun control. The increase was because “I... ... middle of paper ... ...most desprite times. In a world where there is violence daily and many gun crimes there is a need for absolute protection. This type of protection stops an attacker emiditly. Making harsh regulations on guns is similar to making harsh regulations on cars. Giving the keys to a person who has never driven before is extremely dangerous, they need to take classes and go through the proper licensing and tests, this is how guns work today. By limiting and making gun laws stricter the law abiding citizens are enable to have defense in the most despite times. All people hope they never have to defend themselves, however if they do have to they want to be able to and this is with a handgun. In conclusion the current gun laws are fair enough in that they limit criminals from getting them and they allow law abiding citizens to obtain them. Gun laws should not be made stricter.
Gun Laws need to be regulated for multiple reasons. For one thing multiple sources including the United States Center for Disease Control and Prevention have listed the United States as having the highest rate of firearm violence among industrialized nations and being the leader in per-capita gun deaths among industrialized nations. The CDC about one hundred thousand americans are victims of gun violence and thirty thousand people die from gun related wounds every year. As If those 4 stats weren’t enough to justify guns being regulated, we still have to worry about things like gun shows which use loopholes in our current laws to sell guns to mentally ill people or former felons which are then used to help contribute to the multiple school shootings that we’ve seen over the years and other gun related crimes.
Gun admirers have statistics that will prove their side on guns saving lives. According to one study by Lott “… for each additional year that laws allowing people to carry concealed handguns were on the books, robberies decli...
“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.
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.
The first reason handguns should be outlawed for ordinary citizens is because their main purpose is simply to kill other human beings. Why would our country allow us to have the right to own an object that is deadly? Our government seems to want to protect us. For example, seatbelt laws and motorcycle helmet laws were created to protect our lives. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) enforces pollution laws to keep us safe and healthy. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspects food and tests drugs to make sure American citizens are not harmed by nasty food and dangerous drugs. Yet, our government allows just about anybody to own and walk around with guns. It does not appear our government really cares about our safety. If it did, handguns would be outlawed for the general public, because their only purpose is to kill people.
People have questioned gun control long time. Many people wonder if anyone, aside from those who join the law force, should be allowed to carry guns. Benjamin Franklin once said, “Those who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety” (Wright 4). Franklin understood that taking guns away from law-abiding citizens would not uphold their liberty. Some people who argue for gun control state many violent crimes involve guns. Others believe a child could find the gun and something bad could happen to the child or others when a gun is unsafely stored. People who argue against gun control might say there is a huge psychological gap between citizens who shoot to protect themselves or their property and those who go into schools and shoot at others. Criminals will always find a way around gun control laws and will be able to obtain and use guns illegally. The second amendment protects gun rights for individual citizens. Reasonable gun control laws and educational steps can be taken to protect the majority of U.S. citizens. Gun control does not only take guns away from criminals, gun control also limits law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves and their families when necessary.
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...
Gun control has been a controversial issue for many years. A vast majority of citizens believe that if gun control is strictly enforced it would quickly reduce the threat of crime. Many innocent people feel they have the right to bear arms for protection, or even just the pleasure of hunting. Americans have a constitutional right to own hand guns and stricter laws and licensing will not affectively save lives.
The problem with guns is fairly obvious: they decrease the difficulty of killing or injuring a person. In Jeffrey A. Roth's Firearms and Violence (NIJ Research in Brief, February 1994), he points out the obvious dangers. About 60 percent of all murder victims in the United States in 1989 (about 12,000 people) were killed with firearms. Firearm attacks injured another 70,000 victims, some of whom were left permanently disabled. In 1985, the cost of shootings was an estimated $14 billion nationwide for medical care, long-term disability, and premature death. In robberies and assaults, victims are far more likely to die when the perpetrator is armed with a gun than when he or she has another weapon or is unarmed.
The issue of gun control has been around as an important decision opportunity for our country for a while. Many people are wondering whether or not guns really are a helpful tool that many of us have been saying they are, or whether they are the killing machines they have recently been publicized as. In my opinion, guns are a helpful tool in a time of crisis when help is too far away, or is unwilling to come. They are also a part of what makes this nation great. Instead of putting more restrictions on guns and gun owners, we should maintain the ability to protect ourselves, our families, and our friends through the use of firearms.
The United States has a long history with the establishment of gun control laws. In 1791, the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified, declaring “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” New York passed the “Sullivan Act” in 1911, which allowed someone to purchase a gun with a permit required. This was just the beginning. In 1934, Congress passed the “National Firearms Act” which gave someone a $200 tax on gun sales requiring guns to be registered with the treasury. the “Gun Control Act” was passed in 1968, outlawing mail order sales of rifles and guns. Also, Bill Clinton signed the “Violent Crime Control” and “Law Enforcement Act” into law in 1994, which banned the manufacture and sales of assault weapons. The Supreme Court in 1997 declared background checks of the “Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act” unconstitutional which has left a huge impact on society, in which guns are getting in the hands of people with mental illness. Overall, gun control laws have had a long history with the United States, with much more to come.
It has been estimated that out of every one hundred Americans approximately 88 own a gun, and an estimated eleven thousands deaths involving a fire arm occurred in 2013. A recent study by Harvard Medical school and school of public health show that states with stricter gun control laws work in reducing gun related homicides and suicides. So here is where we ask the question if gun control laws are unconstitutional. Or are they put into action and enforced for our own safety. It has been proven to make change and to make it a safer place to live if gun control laws are passed. Over time we have encountered many laws that made it hard for people to possess guns, such as The national Fire Arms Act of 1938 which only allowed fully automatic weapons to be...
First, and foremost many handguns have claimed the lives of too many people. This is a very serious issue we must tackle globally not just in the United States. The same problem is killing our past, present, and future. Gun violence has claimed the lives of so many Americans that we are the leading country in crimes committed by guns. These guns are claiming the lives of people ranging from babies to adults to even the elderly. Handguns are just causing too many deaths.
“Their best defense against injury is to put no defense and give them what they want” (Kates). Critics may argue that concealed handguns are not an effective form of self defense. To the contrary, robbery and assault victims who used a gun were less likely to be attacked or suffer injury, “Neither a martial art skills nor chemical sprays provide a real option for victims faced by attackers who are stronger or armed” (Kates). People feel safer when they carry a concealed weapon because they feel that criminals will avoid attacking them. Citizens want to conceal carry a handgun because every day there are dangerous individuals who prey on the weak. In addition to that, concealed handguns are an effective non-lethal form of self defense a majority of the time. Gary Kleck from the Federal Bureau of Investigation “estimated that, 2 million to 2.5 million victims annually use handguns to repel criminal attackers” (Kates). The surprise of being armed is the advantage for the victim, which the victim has the disadvantage of knowing the time and place of being attacked. Concealed carry actually provides protection to citizens that do not carry because the criminals are not sure who is able to defend themsel...
The first dependent variable to be examined was the amount of people that owned guns in relation to the independent variable, age. From the table it I clear that a high majority of people have at least one gun in their household. People belonging to the younger age group, 18-30, are more likely have one gun in their household than people in the older age groups, 31-50 and 51-95. Another thing that we can infer from this table is that in most households you will only find one gun. From the table we can see that about 87% of people have at least one gun in their house, while the other 13% of people have two or more.