Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Gun control increases crime rates
Gun control increases crime rates
Effects of gun control on crime
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Gun control increases crime rates
Since the invention of firearms, a large number of people have seen, held, shot, or owned a firearm. In today’s society, there is a conflict on the laws surrounding gun shows and how these shows should be handled. Many people believe Congress should attempt to limit the access to these guns, while others believe the current laws in place are substantial. It is believed that gun shows give citizens who wish to commit criminal acts access to obtain these weapons. Limiting access to firearms could help control who is able to buy these guns, however, gun shows are not the only blame for when criminals obtain firearms legally/illegally. Under federal law, when licensed dealers at gun shows sell a gun to a buyer they must perform a background …show more content…
check on the buyer, though state laws on this matter vary state to state for private sellers (“Gun Show Background Checks” pg 1). A private seller is defined as someone who does not rely on gun sales as their livelihood and sell no more than four firearms per year (1). For a gun dealer to even sale firearms at a gun show, there are often several rules and regulations they need to follow, but these rules vary from each individual gun show.
According to the ATF regulations, one of the most common rules they require is that the gun dealer must have their license displayed as well as keeping accurate records of their sells. Some rules even go as far as they can only sell certain firearms to those who live in the state they are living in (“Gun Show Guidelines”). This could essentially create problems to gun dealers who rely on their profits at these gun shows to sustain a way of living. This in return could cause those gun dealers to break the laws and may potentially sell a gun to someone who wish to commit a crime. The guns that are sold at gun shows make up a large amount of the guns that people …show more content…
own. Many people believe that gun sales have decreased in recent years, however, sources state the opposite.
At gun shows, the demand and sales of firearms have increased in the past several years. Moore, a writer for the Business Insider, states that the gun and ammunition manufacturing industry in the U.S. alone brings in $13 billion alone. Sales seem to go up after high profile shootings and when the government calls for increased gun control. This could be due to people wanting to protect their selves and their homes, as well as, protecting their Second Amendment Right. Many people believe in this “right to bear arms” and practice it to its full extent and are willing to protect that right to the best of their ability (Bill of Rights). Even though statistics show that gun sales are increasing as the news reports more and more mass shootings, there is a large amount of citizens who feel that there need to be stricter gun
laws. Due to recent mass shootings and the fear of terrorism, many American citizens are calling for stricter gun laws. President Obama has responded by wanting to increase background checks on future gun owners and work to enforce current laws (Parsons pg 1). Though this appeals too many Americans, how well will this plan actually work? Even if this plan works on public gun shows, how does it affect private gun sales? There are many factors to take into account that involve guns. According to the editorial writer, Eilperin, the idea of informal gun dealers to obtain a license and have background checks came up two years ago (pg 1). This helps to create the idea that though they have been planning this for several years now, the government is just now pushing the idea forward. Gun dealers, however, are not to blame if they perform proper background checks and document information correctly when they sell a gun to a buyer. Mother Jones magazine has created a database of mass shootings that date back to 1982, and data shows that 80% of guns used in mass shootings were obtained through legal means (Follman pg 1). Even though these dealers perform the correct procedure, the gun dealers cannot prevent the buyers from their intentions. Once the gun leaves the gun dealers hand (once a sale and a background check has been made) the gun dealer is no longer responsible. There are some gun dealers though that are not registered and licensed to sell guns at a gun show. Even though ATF (The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) investigators know these gun dealers are selling illegally, it is still a long process to prove they are selling the guns for a profit. This could be a very long and tedious process (Noble pg 1-2). Even if Congress cracks down on gun shows and create stricter laws, it will not fully prevent illegal selling of guns. Noble, a writer for the Washington Times, proves this as they interview former ATF agents. Even though they have been able to catch some illegal sellers, such as the Andrew Phillip Nordstrom case. Nordstrom purchased dozen of guns and quickly turned around and illegally sold them without a license and without performing proper background checks. One buyer was a convicted felon who was working with the ATF. He was able to purchase a 9mm handgun, which he should have not been able to do. This case took over a year of investigation before Nordstrom has charges placed against him. If each investigation takes this long for each illegal seller in each state, it could become almost impossible to catch every individual. One way Congress could make it more difficult for gun dealers to sell guns illegally at gun show is to require them to show their registration/license to the gun show company to prove they are able to legally show guns. Also the gun shows should inspect all the firearms that the gun dealers are trying to sell as well to make sure there are no guns that are not allowed to be sold in the state they are in. Background checks should be made in view of a trained official to ensure that the gun dealers perform proper procedures. They should also be required to document all of their sells with the buyers information and turn it into the people who are in charge of the gun show to double check are sales could be made. If they find anyone who bought a gun, but are not cleared for their background checks, the gun show officials are able to contact this person. This could help prevent the gun show owner future blame for criminals who buy their guns from there as well as protection for the gun show dealer. Completely stopping gun shows will not prevent shootings and gun related crimes from occurring. However, Congress can help to prevent and lower the gun related crimes by future enforcement of the current laws in place.
"Being Prepared in Suburbia" is an essay by Roger Verhulst published in 1992. The purpose of this essay is to show how guns can change a person's mind and emotions. Throughout the essay, Verhulst shares personal examples of his beliefs of gun ownership and personal examples of how his life changed once he bought a Crossman Power Master 760 BB Repeater pump gun. After purchasing the gun, he believed that the reason people like guns so much is because of a passion that gun owners feel. He stated, "This is the feeling that explains their passion, their religious fervor, their refusal to yield. It's rooted in the gut, not in the head" (Verhulst 342). He also realized that personal thoughts and morals about gun ownership change for a gun owner, and, in a sense, how the gun has authority over an individual's life. For example, "But a roving opossum that took up residence in our garage for a few cold nights in January undermined my good intentions" (Verhulst 341). Honestly, those are only excuses and not legitimate reasons. A strong person would not go against his or her beliefs and would know that using a gun should only be for a specific and valid purpose. Throughout the essay, he believes the weak gun legislation and the problems with gun usage are because of a passion that you feel in your gut; in reality, it is a lack of self-control.
Right now, the U.S. has a National Instant Background Check System; however, it contains many flaws. This system is meant to act as a filter to stop the wrong people from having guns. In 2007, the Bipartisan legislation was passed to strengthen this system. It relies on data supplied by the states, but the data is often incomplete and inadequate (Merino 104). Unlicensed gun sellers have also created a dangerous loophole. The law makes an exception for gun sellers who aren’t federally licensed gun dealers. These sellers sell guns informally through venues such as gun shows, and are not required to run background checks. This is a dangerous loophole where people who should not have guns can get them (“Gun”). Senator Frank R. Lautenberg once stated, commenting on the gun sh...
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).
Of Americans 3% own half the country's 265 million guns, that means each of those 3% own more than one gun. We have the individual right to own and use these arms. Gun control is a big debate in politics right now. I personally do not believe in gun control, i just feel like if a good guy had a gun then he would be able to stop things like shootings from happening. So do organizations like the NRA (National Rifle Association), the GOA (Gun Owners of America), and the SAF (Second Amendment Foundation) “The answer to crime is not gun control, its law enforcement and self-control” (Alan Keyes political activist) This violates our second amendment right of the U.S. constitution to keep and bear arms. So it's all in the best interest that we keep gun control from happening, so that we can keep our second amendment.
Gun violence in America has escalated drastically over the years. But it seems the only time we are outraged about the shootings or abuse of the 2nd Amendment is when there is a massacre of innocent people or a cop misusing his power and killing an innocent black person. “There have been at least 110 mass shootings in the US since 2009 at least 33 of which occurred in a public place” (TJF). After the vigils and outcries for change for change that fall on deaf ears, the problem is ignored and the abuse of the 2nd Amendment continues. There is no reform but instead there is another battle between the NRA, Congress, and the President of the United States. Gun regulation is constantly debated and is a very subjective topic because of the differing
Although the Second Amendment prevents the federal government from completely banning guns in America, limited restrictions are allowed on the distribution and possession of firearms. Certain groups of people such as criminals, the mentally unstable, and soldiers dishonorably discharged from the military are prohibited from possessing or interacting with firearms (Flynn). These restrictions are enforced by background checks in some states on both a state and federal level. However, gun laws vary from state to state and are often not thorough enough; the background checks are flawed due to lack of information and misinformation, and guns can easily end up in the hands of criminals and malevolent individuals. The ease of obtaining a firearm in America fosters crime and a dangerous environment. Hence, the Second Amendment should be reinterpreted so that stricter gun laws can be implemented because modern citizens do not require guns, current background checks are flawed, gun...
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.
It is also a belief that requiring background checks for individuals purchasing weapons at gun shows will stop criminals from possessing guns. This is another misconception. There are over 240 million guns in America. Over 40 percent of all homes in the United States have guns. (Cannon) It would be impossible to enforce any type of legislation to control all of these guns. (Barone) Criminals will be able to obtain guns regardless of any new legislation that is enacted. An example of one of these new laws is the "one gun a month law" that is being introduced in Congress. (Bai 30) Supporters of this law want to make it so no one can purchase more than one gun a month. The intention is that criminals will not be able to go out and buy a bunch of weapons at once and commit a crime. This is ludicrous. The children that committed the high school shootings, and many other crimes that involve guns, were committed with guns that were obtained illegally. (Cloud 35) The only people that will suffer from the "one gun a month law" are the gun manufactures. (Bai 30) This is a bill that is designed to slow their sales and to hurt them financially.
Background checks lay a big role in the ownership of guns and by applying stricter background checks it could most likely decrease the rate of gun crime. Even with stricter background checks criminals will still be able to obtain guns online or at private gun shows but if we were to say make private gun shows illegal that would prevent at risk people from obtaining firearms that are meant to do harm to others. Private gun shows now don’t have to do background checks and this causes a problem because we don’t know who they may be selling these firearms to and what the person they sell them to attends to do with them. With lack of background control within private gun shows there has been a proven increase of guns falling into the hands of criminals in and out of state. If we were to close this loophole by making private gun shows illegal or even making them have to do background checks like any other gun seller we would close the loophole and reduce the gun ownership to criminals and high risk
The United States today can be a scary place. Someone that is disgruntled, has a mental health issue, radicalized through terrorist propaganda or for any other reason can take up a firearm and mass murder innocent people. It can happen anywhere, anytime, anyplace. Anyone that pays attention to any news or newspapers has probably heard something about gun control. It’s a hot topic in this country and around the world. There are a lot of problems with gun control and regulating guns in the United States. Before you can talk about solutions you need to isolate the problems keeping the solutions from being realized. The people who are for and against guns do have common solutions but there is strong opposition
Crime and guns. The two seem to go hand in hand with one another. But are the two really associated? Do guns necessarily lead to crime? And if so do laws placing restrictions on firearm ownership and use stop the crime or protect the citizens? These are the questions many citizens and lawmakers are asking themselves when setting about to create gun control laws. The debate over gun control, however, is nothing new. In 1924, Presidential Candidate, Robert La Follete said, “our choice is not merely to support or oppose gun control but to decide who can own which guns under what conditions.” Clearly this debate still goes on today and is the very reason for the formation of gun control laws.
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).
The gun control laws have a positive side and a negative side about it. One positive is how it prevents a convicted felon from buying or owning and having possession of any type of firearm which helps to prevent any future crimes from that individual. This prevention is done by a background check known as “The Brady Background Check", which is the process of this background check that is completed by a (FFL) Federal Firearms Licensed person. This licensed individual must get specific information from the person wanting to purchase the firearm and put the information into a computer database known as the “National Instant Criminal Background Check System” (NICS). The following would be some of the information needed from the purchaser to complete the check: the purchasers full legal name, nickname, and date of birth, current address, past address, phone number, color of eyes, and color of hair, race, and gender. They would also need to fill out a form as to whether or not the firearm is being purchased for someone else or themselves. This database would crosscheck three datab...
Gun control is an awfully big issue in the United States today. Many people in America don’t agree with the gun control laws that they have today. Gun control laws only take guns and freedom away from law-abiding citizens. Many citizens have their own reasons for owning a gun. Why would the government want to make it harder for people to own a gun? People that own guns aren’t very likely to be attacked by criminals. Owning a handgun is one of the best ways of protection when used correctly. The second amendment states “the right to bear arms”; does this grant everyone the right to own a gun? Gun control laws have not been proven to do anything for citizens. Gun control laws just make it harder for the good guy average Joe to own a gun. Gun control laws are not a good idea, and are taking part in the loss of our freedom that was given to us.
Firearms are dangerous weapons used to intentionally and unintentionally kill people, which lead to one of America�s most heated debates: gun control. With increasing crime and violence, many people look to gun control laws as a way to slow these trends down. On the other hand, others believe that owning a gun is a constitutional right that should never be taken away. James Q. Wilson�s essay �Just Take Away Their Guns� is an attempt to offer a solution to both sides of this argument. He claims that illegal possession of firearms is the problem and that frisking suspicious characters would be a good solution to the debate of gun control. However, random frisking to end illegal gun possession is a violation of privacy and an overbearing task that would be impossible to take on.