Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Gun control problem in society today
School shootings and gun laws
Consequences of gun control
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Gun control problem in society today
In an ideal world, weapons wouldn’t be needed, but when and where historically has that ever been the case? Then, there’s the argument our government and police will protect us, but how effective were they during the recent Florida massacre, or any other recent mass murder for that matter? Obviously, if your enemy has an automatic weapon, you need one too, or at least they must think you possibly have one, so the solution must be banning them entirely, but when has a ban on anything actually worked? In reality, a gun ban would only keep law-abiding citizens from having them, while further emboldening criminals. Moreover, while most of us probably agree Nikolas Cruz shouldn’t have been able to buy a gun legally, that probably wouldn’t have stopped
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.
New York Times writer Jeff McMahan argues in his 2012 article, “Why Gun ‘Control’ Is Not Enough”, that the United States should ban gun ownership entirely, or almost entirely. McMahan, 1) McMahan creates his main argument around the idea that when more and more citizens become armed, “criminals work to be better armed and more efficient in their use of guns.” (McMahan, 1) Ultimately, he argues that although some with guns may be safer than if they were without the guns, but the without guns become much more vulnerable. So why not just arm everyone with guns, as gun activists would say, then wouldn't everyone be safer? No.
The Economist (2015) article also states that since Obama’s election into office, there has been 450% increace of American gun makers Smith & Wesson’s share price.
This essay will discuss the pros and cons of gun control. Some U.S. States have already adopted some of these gun control laws. I will be talking about the 2nd amendment, public safety, home safety, and do gun control laws really control guns. I hope after you have read this you will be more educated, and can pick your side of the gun control debate. So keep reading and find out more about the gun control laws that the federal and some state governments want to enforce on U.S. Citizens.
Is it any coincidence that the states with the loosest gun laws in America tend to contribute to the highest amount of national gun deaths and injuries? This is one of the main questions we should be asking when deciding what is best for our country and its citizens. Although gun control has been an ongoing issue, certain events like the Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook, and the Aurora, Colorado mass shootings have increased our attention to this topic. Although I believe that Americans possess the right to own a firearm, I believe there should be detailed screening and control systems to keep guns out of the wrong hands, to prevent more gun violence from happening in the future.
Imagine... you are driving down the street to see your loving family. You stop at a gas station and a guy comes in. He has a bandana and bad intentions. All of a sudden, he loads a pistol and aims it towards you. What are your options? Try to visualize, a guy going to see his wife and kids, but when out of nowhere a person pulls you aside and then points a pistol at you. Over the course of years, ninety-three United States citizens are killed with guns. Due to these reasons, it seems it is necessary to get rid of guns because of the 21,175 suicides, 505 deaths due to accidental/ negligent discharge of a firearm. Guns should be banned for civilian use, due to too many deaths from unregistered users, misuse, and increased crime rate.
Gun violence in the United States is higher than ever, and criminals with guns will “…kill as many as 1000 people each day” (Alpers&Wilson). Taking this into perspective, it is only right to fight fire with fire or, in this case, use a gun to protect yourself and those around you. Gun control does not only decrease the ability for protection, it also decreases our rights as U.S citizens. The constitution clearly states that we are given the right to bear arms, meaning we may carry fire arms. Even if we have stricter laws for guns, it will not stop killers from shooting innocent people. These men and women causing damage to the lives of numerous individuals do not care if there is a law banning guns, because all they truly want to do is hurt others. The pain citizens endure every day from losing a family member, friend, or even just a colleague is repulsive. These permanent deaths continue to make people fearful and it causes damage in their lives; unless something is done. Most people agree that action needs to be taken to stop this inhumane cruelty, but the question is; what can be done? Americans need protection, rights, and power to break this inexcusable gun violence circling America. Gun restrictions for trustworthy and reliable gun owners have not been proven to weaken gun violence in the United States; therefore, gun control should be limited because it is only hurting America, not helping it.
Legislation restricting arms also known as “gun control” does not positively impact crime reduction rates.
Right now the government has limited firearm purchasing only to people who pass certain steps. Gun control has risen as a controversial subject in the United States today. Many say gun control or banning of all firearms will help protect and make our country a better place. Reasons many are wanting to ban firearms are that the 2nd amendment is out dated and unjustified in this date and time. Writer Eugene Robinson states that “farmers wrote of “arms,” thinking about muskets and single shot pistols. They could not have foreseen modern rifles or high-capacity magazines.” Many agree with Mr. Robinson saying that back when the constitution was written they couldn’t have understood what was going to come in the future. Citizens also believe people have no reason to fight against intruders that come in their home that’s what the authorities are for. If people what to defend themselves why waste the money and time on having police? In this day and age why have weapons why not cut out all firearms and just be one happy country, it’s that simple, but is it really that simple? (“Assault Weapons Must Be Banned in
Gun control and gun banning have been a highly controversial issue since all the gun crimes hitting the news in America. Crimes like Sandy-Hook , Aurora , San Berdindno , and Oregon have lawmakers thinking about banning guns by enacting laws that allows them to. Lawmakers believe guns are the prime suspect in all these gun violence crimes and they believe it well reduce murder and violence. Banning guns well do nothing to reduce the mass killings. If a criminal has the intent to commit a crime nothing can stop them. Also a criminal doesn’t abide by the law that is why they are criminals. Gun banning would only disarm the legal law abiding citizen leaving them defenseless. Also the right to bear arms is guaranteed by the Constution and the Bill of Rights. If lawmakers have the courage take away one Constutional right they will have the courage to keep going, I have three logical reasons why gun banning well not work.
Over the last 20 years mass shootings have become more common. More and more people are becoming concerned with guns, and the fact they are being used for killing innocent people. Over the past year we’ve had shootings in Orlando, Dallas, and multiple other cities. Many people have come to the conclusion that guns need to go. Others believe there should be background checks for every person who would like to purchase a firearm. Federal laws already prohibit some people from being able to purchase a weapon. The list includes convicted felons, immigrants without legal status, and people diagnosed with certain types of mental illness (“The Fight over Guns,” 2016). Guns should be a ton harder to buy than they are at the
Imagine you are woken up to a noise in your home at 2:00 a.m. An intruder has broken into your home and is armed with an illegally obtained handgun. Guns are outlawed where you live, so you have no way to defend yourself. A call to the police might work, but the police are ten minutes away. In this situation, ten minutes could mean life or death for you and your family. What are you going to do? You do not have very many options. Banning guns is a very illogical idea because not all murders involve guns, guns are used for recreation and hunting, and criminals do not obey laws. Gun control laws have been starting to become more prominent in American culture as a result of the increase in the number of mass shootings around the country. These laws do not necessarily decrease the murder rate, and in some cases, banning guns has resulted in the murder rate increasing, which defeats the whole purpose of the gun ban.
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.
Anti-gun politicians are not wrong after all, as we all know guns are used to impair and injure potential victims and naturally people should not have access to these dangerous items. With logical reasoning, clearly any substance or thing that can hurt someone should be taken away or severely limited to only the highest extent. Private Citizens do not need a gun for self-protection because the police are there to guard them, although the Supreme Court tends to rule differently. When confronted by aggressive and violent criminals, you should "put up no defense, give them what they want, or run quickly" (Chairman Pete Shields, 125). Vulnerability of a person during the course of crime causes the safety factor in the situation to increase significantly. Guns are a good place to start, but honestly why stop there? I will further discuss objects that rhyme with gun that should be monitored and controlled as well.
Some people believe that taking away guns will reduce or even wipe out the number of attacks or killings. The truth though is that nothing will stop the worlds problems. Even if we take away the guns in the world people are still going to be filled with hate and murder. In fact, if we bans guns in the U.S., how will people defend themselves against a robbery or some other heinous act. The answer is that it wont help. Even if guns are banned what's to that people won't but the guns illegally. In this world people will always find a way to get what they want even if that way is illegal.