Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Gun control can reduce crime essay
Gun control can reduce crime essay
Gun control can reduce crime essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Gun control can reduce crime essay
Many people side against the idea that guns make our society a safer place to live. Sarah Boseley, a health editor, wrote an article about a group of scientists who looked at many different countries to see if any correlation stood between guns and safety. She says that scientists have found that “... the US, with the most guns per head in the world, has the highest rate of deaths from firearms, while Japan, which has the lowest rate of gun ownership has the least. (Boseley)” This evidence shows that the scientists have found that more guns leads to a higher death rate making society a more dangerous place. A strength of this source is how the editor shows where she got her information, but a weakness is the fact that she uses a counterargument. …show more content…
(Cole)” Other studies have shown that gun restriction leads to a “decline in gun-related deaths, gun-related suicides, and mass shooting. (Cole)” From the evidence shown, it seems that the restriction of guns would cause a decline in gun violence in many different aspects. A strength of the source is that we know we can trust the author due to her experience and degree. There is a weakness due to the slippery slope logical fallacy that says that the risk of suicide and homicide will increase because this is not true for all homes. Procon.org says that a reason in favor for gun control is the need to protect women from stalkers and domestic abusers. It explains that “a woman’s risk of being murdered increases by 500% if a gun is present during a dispute.(procon.org)” Statistics also show that “86% of women killed by firearms were in the United States.(procon.org)” Maybe these women would still be alive if we were to have stricter gun control laws to protect these women from harm.
John Luik author of the article “The Increased Availability of Guns Reduces Crime” and Sabina Thaler the author of the article “The Claim of Increased Gun Availability Reduces Crime is Unfounded” are two examples of people having different opinions on such a debatable topic. Both authors talk about guns taking people’s lives, Thalers article focuses on guns taking innocent people’s lives, and Luiks article focuses on guns being innocent people’s protection. Many gun supporters will say that more guns will bring down the crime rate. These same believers will give facts stating that the more guns in a state, the less likely gun owners will use them. “The chances of innocent people being the victims of violent crime, including murder, decrease—not increase—when access to guns is made easier” (Luik).
Left, right, Liberal, Conservative, Democratic, Republican. There are a lot of synonyms for the sides of our nation divided. Divided on many things: religion, political views, morals, etc.. For a nation that prides ourselves on extraordinary security and unity, it is quite ironic that so many issues can cause such distress and uproar within communities. One such issue is gun control. As a white male in a middle-lower class family that has never owned a gun, I may be somewhat biased. Objectively as I can, I am going to report the facts and more importantly, try to find the core issues at play.
Supporters of gun control state that to decrease crimes committed with fire arms (which amass a high majority of crimes) guns should be banned from private ownership. This removes guns from the public, therefore taking away the instrument of easily accomplishing crimes. Arthur Kellermann and Donald T. Raey, two gun control advocates, did their own research into the issue and published a discovery of their own; the 43-1 Statistic. In this statistic, Kellerman and Raey state that a gun will be used in a justified shooting one time, while forty three other people are killed by a gun unjustly, either by suicide, accident, or criminal (Heumer 9). According to these two researchers, gun ownership is not worth it. Private ownership of guns saved one life wh...
They say more murders will be committed, but the gun rate is the highest it has ever been in 1991 and since then in 2012 murder rate has decreased to 49%, a 52% drop(Ten Reasons Why States Should Reject “Assault Rifle” and “Large” Magazine Bans). Statistics say that even though bans are put in place to reduce crime it doesn’t. In another article it states that California banned assault rifles in 1989 and the murder rate increased every year and over the course of five years it increased 26%. Two-thirds of the murders today committed with firearms, but of those two-thirds, 69% are committed with handguns not rifles(Banning ‘Assault Weapons’ Is Not the Answer).
Violence in the United States is a major problem, but our politicians only want to focus on gun violence, and some of them believe the solution to ending gun violence is by preventing law abiding citizens from exercising their second amendment rights. Guns are easier to commit a crime with than other weapons, or without a weapon at all, but with an estimated 270 million guns the hands of citizens (11 facts), if they were the problem we would know it by now. It is undeniable that guns are responsible for a high amount of crime, but we already have tens of thousands of gun laws in the United States (How many gun laws are there?), that haven’t been able to curb gun violence. If the current laws were working, then maybe there would be a reasonable
A counter to the argument in the pros paragraph would be "assault weapons bans did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level" and "states with restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons had higher gun-related murders" (Should, 1). Basically the pro side says that gun control will reduce gun deaths, the con side says the opposite that the even if gun control laws are put into play the number of deaths will actually increase. Another con the is presented is a counter to gun control laws helping make sure guns are used for self-defense. The con says that gun control laws will not prevent from criminals getting a hold of guns and using them to break laws. Research shows that “Of 62 mass shootings in the United States between 1982 and 2012, 49 of the shooters used legally obtained guns. Collectively, 143 guns were possessed by the killers with about 75% obtained legally” (Should, 1). Essentially statistics for gun control and against gun control go head to head from what has been
Guns have the potential to inflict serious injuries, and intensify violence. Gun violence is a constant issue the United States has dealt with for many years. Gun violence is preventable. It can be prevented through a public health approach that keeps communities and families safe. Violence is an epidemic in this society. Preventing the spread of violence has to be a priority.
Just in the US there are over 100,000 people shot each year. 72 perecent of all violent killings use guns as the weapon. 40 percent of US homes have guns, 57 percent of people in which do have guns believe there should be major restrictions or a ban on guns. In January 2016, Obama announced new actions on gun control, these actions include an update and expansion on background checks. The Supreme Court held a collective right that to own guns is a purpose for maintaining a militia. There should be more gun control laws because it would help reduce the high rate of violent crimes. More laws need to be made to protect oneself from harm of others.
If there are restrictions on the gun ownership laws, and also a restriction in use, then these are crimes would reduce significantly, and there would be fewer reports of suicides and homicides in America. No other country in the world has such high rates of gun ownership as the United States. It is the use of these guns that has been associated with the constant reports of homicides, and the same guns are used to commit suicides. Clearly, if there is a reduction in the private ownership of guns, then it becomes possible to drastically reduce the violence resulting from the accessibility of
The shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary sparked a great deal of public awareness and led to an unprecedented debate regarding gun violence. According to the U.S. Secret Service, there is no profile for a school shooter. However, since shootings tend to be planned in advance and oftentimes youth tell others of the plan, a threat assessment approach was recommended. After Sandy Hook, millions of TV viewers were tuned into various politically motivated mass media debates. Media bias in favor of the NRA's view of the Second Amendment (as protecting individual gun ownership) was so pervasive that even many gun-control supporters seemed unaware that the federal high courts never found a gun law to have violated the Second Amendment. While it well known that guns do contribute to the many fears of students today, this behavior in America's neighborhoods cannot be ignored. Impact of gun violence has a devastating and long lasting effect on community. As victims and families recover, basic research continues in search of answers. Motivation for shootings is hard to pin down, however gender is the single most obvious variable when it comes to gun violence in America.
The question of whether gun control policies increase, decrease or have no effect on rates of gun violence is a difficult scientific question. While a variety of disparate sources of data on rates of firearm-related injuries and deaths, firearms markets, and the relationships between rates of gun ownership and violence exist, research into the efficacy of various gun controls has been largely inadequate. A 2004 National Research Council critical review found that while some strong conclusions are warranted from current research, the state of our knowledge is generally poor. Despite the potential for improved research design, the National Research Council review concludes that the gaps in our knowledge on the efficacy of gun control policies are due primarily to inadequate data and not to weak research methods. The result of the scarcity of relevant data is that gun control is one of the most fraught topics in American politics and scholars remain deadlocked on a variety of issues. Notably, since 1996 the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has been prohibited from using its federal funding "to advocate or promote gun control," effectively ending gun violence research at the agency. The funding provision's author has said that this was an
In the United States of America, millions of citizens own guns – lawfully and unlawfully.
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.
Additionally, more laws and policies such as the Brady Law need to be either updated or increased especially given their effectiveness. Politicians need to stop being influenced by big money and actually take these matters seriously. Politics are suppose to help people not harm them and you are suppose to be a politician so you better society not yourself. If we had less selious politicians than more would get done and greater stronger laws would be enacted and the brady law would not stand on its own. According to a study by the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence the percentage of recovered crime guns that were traced to dealers in for in the four Brady states was greater for guns purchased before the Act took effect when compared to guns
The debate over gun control in America has constantly brought up over the years due to gunmen killing large amounts of civilizations in shootings. From Columbine to Sandy Hook or the shootings of the two reporters in West Virginia, these public shootings are occurring everywhere. Lawmakers and civilians alike are pushing for increased gun control in hopes of preventing the same tragedies. Anybody that has been affected by the shootings have been pushing Congress and state governments to force new sanctions on government. With the past three years, Congress has shot down all the laws despite the large amounts of public support. Adding more gun control isn’t going to stop the mass shootings from happening.