Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Gun control does not reduce crime study
The effect of gun control
Can gun control save lives
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Gun control does not reduce crime study
“Gun control or carry permits won't stop mass murder” authored by James Alan Fox argues that stricter regulations on the sales of firearms may decrease violence but will not affect the purchase of firearms through the black market and therefore will not be an effective solution to mass shootings. Fox states that creating more restrictive measures for obtaining firearms will only deter a person to find an easier way to obtain said firearm. Criminals will most likely get firearms illegally, and therefore restrictions may prove to have little to no use. The article mentions the 2012 shootings that happened at the movie theatre in Aurora, Colorado. Questions about firearm restrictions were raised due to this event. Furthermore, this article discusses
that stricter laws on gun control will not change the planning behind mass shootings. As said in this article, those who execute mass shootings typically have very detailed plans. Fox says, “Mass killers are determined, deliberate and dead-set on murder.” The importance of knowing this is the fact that those carrying out these mass shootings will indefinitely obtain a firearm in some way, whether it be legal or illegal. Fox mentions a method that may assist with gun control. It is suggested by pro-gun advocates that the allowance of people to carry concealed firearms may be able to prohibit mass shootings. This article examines both sides of the gun control debate and offers unbiased solutions to the issue. Fox is also an unbiased reporter as he places his stance on this topic. I do support wholeheartedly certain reasonable gun restrictions -- steps designed to reduce our nation's overall rate of firearms violence. Still, murder in its most extreme form, as in the Colorado shooting, is particularly difficult to prevent through gun regulations, or other strategies, for that matter. Of course, that doesn't mean we shouldn't try nonetheless. Author James Alan Fox of this article has a Ph.D. and a bachelor’s degree in sociology along with two master’s degrees, one being in criminology and the other in statistics which all come from the Ivy League titled University of Pennsylvania. Fox has researched mass murders and has published books as well as published newspaper columns and articles.
Many Americans are now applying for a license to carry licensed concealed arms with them. The rate at which licenses are being approved is worrying. This development is concerning law enforcement authorities. Putting so many firearms at the disposal of the public is counterproductive to the gains that are being made on improving security and especially in the cities where incidences of gun crime and violence are on the rise.
Some people believe that extremely tight gun control laws will eliminate crime, but gun control laws only prevent the 'good guys' from obtaining firearms. Criminals will always have ways of getting weapons, whether it be from the black market, cross borders, or illegal street sales. New gun control laws will not stop them. Since the shootings of Columbine High School, Virginia Tech, and Sandy Hook, the frequency of mass shootings has increased greatly. Gun control is not effective as it has not been shown to actually reduce the number of gun-related crimes. Instead of considering a ban of private firearm possession, and violating individual ownership rights, it may be more practical to consider the option of partially restricting firearm access.
Frates, Chris. “The Gun Debate Isn’t Over Yet.” National Journal (2013): Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Web. 31 Oct. 2013.
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.
Multiple mass shootings such in Aurora, Colorado, Roseburg, Oregon and Newport, Connecticut has sparked massive gun control disagreement. The media has influenced two point of views regarding this topic. One side argues that increasing gun control decreases casualties of mass shootings, while the other side claims decreasing gun control increases self-defense. In a US News article by Susan Milligan, she argues that “although gun control does not stop criminal activity, it decreases accidental deaths and suicide”, thus saving lives. LA Times writer and social policy professor, James Wilson claims gun control does not solve gun violence and makes it harder for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves. Both authors use language to convince the
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.
For many years, America has witnessed mass shootings within it’s borders. In 2015 alone, there were 372 mass shootings (Oldham). The question most Americans are faced with is: do we need more gun control or is gun control the problem? With more gun control, it can be made mandatory that protective devices are used on firearms to prevent accidental harm. Gun control creates mandatory laws such as the requirement for an individual to pass a background check before he/she is permitted to purchase a firearm. Gun control has also been proven to prevent suicides due to the increased difficulty of obtaining a firearm. Those who believe that gun control is the problem claim that by removing one 's firearms, you are endangering them to threats that
Imagine being forced to crawl and hide with gunshots near your ears. Imagine seeing people shot to death in front of you. Believe it or not, scenes like these occur on a daily basis in America. In the first 320 days of this year there were 325 mass shootings in the nation, defined as where there were more than four victims at each shooting. (Mass Shooting Tracker). This egregious level of violence is unacceptable in a developed country and major reform in gun legislation to improve the tragic state of public safety in the United States today. Although critics of expanded gun legislation incorrectly argue that easier access to guns increases safety and that gun laws are unconstitutional, it is imperative that America adopts stronger gun control legislation because heightened regulations reduce crime rates and have successfully improved public safety in other developed countries. In a country like the United States, no one
According to Gerney, Parsons, and Posner (2013), in the wake of mass shootings and other types of gun-related disasters, an increase in interest among the public, community leaders, and elected officials occurs, with regards to identifying effective means through which to minimize the possibility for recurrence of such incidences. Some of the reactions at such times include the enactment of more strict gun control laws to limit the accessibly of firearms to individuals with the criminal intent of committing a gun-related crime.
“A handgun ban is not realistically enforceable. Confiscating guns would require house-to-house searches and alienate the very individuals whose compliances is essential to the success of any regulation. If gun ownership were prohibited, organized crime would step in to provide the firearms that will continue to be procured with criminal intent” (Done Kates). Over the past decade, the media has reported an increase in the severity of violent crimes as individuals have killed and hurt many others, including kids. Since 2006 there have been over 200 mass murders in the United States. Between 2006 and 2011 alone, the FBI has counted over 172 cases of mass killings, not including those unreported from different police agencies to the FBI (“Murders
Despite Norway’s strict requirements in order to own a gun, they couldn’t prevent a mass shooting that took the lives of 77 people in 2011 (Masters). One thing you don’t hear very often from the leaders of our country, is the idea that more guns could prevent shootings. In the United States, we have “gun free zones,” which include schools and other public places. In these areas, guns are strictly prohibited, and instead of preventing shootings have actually became a target for them.Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC), “found that 92 percent of mass shootings since 2009 have taken place in designated gun-free zones” (Blackwell). The author of “Ban gun-free zones,” Ken Blackwell claims that those who commit mass shootings want the publicity, and will go where they know they can do the most damage, because the more serious the shooting is, the more publicity it will receive. Blackwell goes on to say, “most mass shootings don’t end until the police arrive. Killers typically have several minutes to slaughter as many victims as they can without fear of interference” (Blackwell). John Lott, the author of “A Look at the Facts on Gun-Free Zones,” backs up Blackwell’s claims of mass shooters targeting places where guns are prohibited. Lott uses evidence from mass shooters themselves as his evidence, and one very recent tragedy is the shooting in a Charleston, South Carolina church, in June 2015. According to the Crime Research Prevention Center, cited by Lott in his article, the shooter told those around him about his plans to carry out the shooting. His original plan was to go to the College of Charleston, but apparently veered away from the college when he realized that there was heavily armed security, obviously settling for the Church. Another example is James Holmes, who committed a mass shooting in a movie theatre. Holmes had what Lott referred to as a
Public mass shootings have increased at an alarming rate over the past three decades and have become a growing concern for the people of the United States. It has appeared that approximately every few months, media outlets report incidences of tragedy involving a sole gunman targeting groups of people with the intent to harm or extinguish life due to various motives. Recent research data indicated that over 80 public mass shootings have occurred in the United States since 1983. Some of the more recent shootings to date are: Marysville-Pilchick High in October 2014; Santa Barbara, California in May 2014; Fort Hood, Texas U.S. Army base in April 2014; Washington Navy Yard in September 2013; Sandy Hook Elementary, Connecticut in December 2012; and Aurora Century 16 Movie Theater in Aurora, Colorado in July 2012.
Mass shootings have become a common occurrence in the United States society and have brought our society's safety debate to the attention of American politics. Both sides of the debate agree that we need more safety precautions but neither side can officially agree on what is to be done. What can we do about the raging number of mass shootings? There is no definite solution for mass shootings but there are precautions the United States can take to try to overcome the overwhelming number of mass shootings occurring. Gun Control is a major topic in the debate of how we can keep our society safer but how is what remains a mystery but we can start with altering the second amendment, and having stronger gun laws and background checks.
Gun control, when you tightly grasp the grip of the gun with two hands, properly place hands on the gun, stand with feet planted shoulder-width apart, and extend your arms to absorb the recoil of the gun. By doing so, you are operating the gun responsibly and safely. Proper gun control will establish a safer and more accurate shot each time. By exercising control of their weapon, the gunmen can safely operate their equipment in a responsible way without harming themselves or others. Many people mistake proper gun control as removing all weapons from the hands of law-abiding citizens and forbidding ownership. Not only does this violate the 2nd amendment, but it also puts many lives in danger. One example that portrays this violation is when
On the morning of December 14, 2012 at approximately 9:30 am, tragedy broke in the small town school of Sandy Hook Elementary in Newton, Connecticut. The lives of 27 innocent people were taken. The gunman Adam Lanza fatally shot 20 schoolchildren, 6 adult staff members and his own mother’s before turning the gun on himself. This incident has since been branded the second deadliest mass shooting, next to the 2007 Virginia Tech Massacre. The tragedy ignited a very controversial debate about the regulation of guns more known as gun control. The argument of gun control circles around the impact of passing laws to regulate the sales and possession of firearms. Gun advocates argue that the passing of gun control laws will be a violation of their second amendment rights, which protects the rights of an individual to keep and bear arms. Those supporting gun control are in favor for the instituting of policies that make the sales and possession of firearms even stricter, perhaps the ultimate banning of guns. Should we wait for horrific tragedies to pressure lawmakers to pass gun control laws or should they be already be enforced to protect the people and make society safer? Gun control laws need to be enforced on the account that guns are becoming more and more accessible; it will ensure the safety of our citizens and will perhaps decrease gun violence.