Datasets:

ktmeng

/

mec

like 0

gun-control

Gun control has recently been the center of many political debates as a result of many devastating world wide events. Some argue that all Americans have the right to bare arms while others argue that limiting the availability of firearms will only better American society. These two drastically different views have created conflict for centuries. On December 14 2012 a murderer by the name of Adam Lanza entered Sandy Hook Elementary school with his mother’s assault rifle and brutally murdered 20 children and 6 employees.

gun-control

This is only one of the many horrifying events that question the government’s regulations on guns in our country. As a result many ideas regarding regulating access to guns have been brought up. Although the question remains. What is the right thing to do? On June 21 1788 the constitution was ratified and the second amendment gave all citizens the right to bear arms. But why was this right so important to the founding fathers that it had to be the 2nd amendment?

gun-control

Prior to the constitution the right to bear arms was only given to soldiers employed by the government (Lund). For this reason alone the founding fathers felt it was necessary to allow all citizens the right to bear arms. Today very few people who support the right to bear arms would argue that they need their firearm in case of an oppressed government taking over. A society changes over time and the rules of that society must adapt in order to achieve maximum success and happiness.

gun-control

If America doesn’t adapt to its changing society, the country will never progress. School shootings, gang violence, and gun related murders all have a direct correlation with the accessibility to firearms in our country. A recent study conducted by the Harvard injury control research center proves that more gun accessibility results in more homicides (Miller). There is no sugar coating it.

gun-control

The more guns American citizens put into this country the more people we take out in gun related deaths. The study also proves that the correlation between gun accessibility and homicide does not relate to non gun related homicides. Proving that the homicides were only committed because of the accessibility to guns not because of the people living in the area. The Sandy Hook Elementary school shooting, Columbine shooting, and Virginia Tech shooting where all a result of easy accessibility to weapons in one’s household. The two seventeen year old shooters in the Columbine High school shooting acquired two 12-gauge shotguns and two 9mm firearms through their friends for a total of $500. The shooter of the Sandy Hook Elementary school shooting stole his weapon, a .22 caliber savage MK 11-F bolt action rifle, from his mother (Wilson). In every gun related homicide the attacker had easy access to a firearm. These deaths can easily be prevented by simply cutting down on firearm accessibility. On the other hand, those against gun control argue that the number of firearms in America is so large that applying gun control laws will only make matters worse. Currently there are approximately 270-310 million guns across American households (Wilson).

gun-control

Confiscating every firearm is an impossible task and taking away weapons from the law abiding citizens will leave criminals armed while citizens are defenceless. Possibly resulting in a terrible backlash and create more violence throughout the country. Criminals would have a tremendous advantage over the average law abiding citizen. One could break into a home and not worry about the home owner retaliating. Self defense is necessary in today’s violent society and many people who argue against gun control will say that self defense with a firearm is needed in today’s society. Although a recent study conducted by the violence policy center proves the majority of firearm related homicides have nothing to do with self defence. Not to mention that in most cases a firearm intended to be used for self defence will often injure the owner of the firearm. The study also showed that a firearm is far more likely to be stolen than to be used for self defence (McLaughlin).

gun-control

Therefore this argument is clearly invalid. There are many other “safer” weapons that can act as a replacement for firearms. Tasers for example have proven to provide just as much protection as firearms with little to no deaths as a result. There will always be an alternative to firearms those who believe differently usually tend to use firearms for recreational use rather than for self defense. Many phones and tablet have fingerprint technology that only allows access to the owner of the cell phone. Recently pro gun control activists have been fighting for more security options on firearms. For example a simple passcode to arm the weapon or even enabling fingerprint technology to ensure only the owner of the weapon can fire it. Recently President Obama has been promoting smart gun technology. Smart gun technology uses methods such as fingerprint and even phone compatibility to recognize the owner of the weapon (Mearian). Smart guns are the future of gun control in America. It is possible that in less than a decade all firearms will have smart gun technology enabled. Gun control will continue to be the topic of many debates unless our government takes responsibility for the thousands of lives taken every year from these deadly weapons. Whether it is school shootings, mass murders, or a simple gunshot, American society is becoming more tolerant of gun homicides. As a country, we need to take control of this problem. As long as firearms are as accessible as they are today America will never be truly safe.

gun-control

McDonald’s points seem valid, for one the law restricts handgun ownership in turn the right to own and bear arms. Some places require proof of ownership of firearms before registration, thus making point two impossible. Point tree has only one real flaw I can see there being grounds for arguing and that is the fee, if that wasn’t there it would be fine; but this fee makes it economically infeasible for people to own a gun.

gun-control

And finally if a gun is deemed unable to be registered this restricts an individual’s ability to bear that specific arm. Previously in the similar case of District of Columbia v. Heller the Supreme Court ruled that the second amendment did indeed protect individuals, as long as they were on or in federal property within the state.

gun-control

This left precedent for McDonald v. Chicago. A major reason this case is in fact such a landmark is not its conclusion to the question left open by the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, but its potential to overturn the slaughter-house cases’ ruling which ruled that the fourteenth amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause did not include the second amendment or the Bill of Rights in general. If this case does indeed overturn the slaughter-house rulings then this will leave a window for any other possible change to laws based on infractions of the Bill of Rights, this makes this case a seat sitter for those for McDonald, against him and others with their own agendas waiting for the right opportunity.

gun-control

This case calls the second amendment and well in a way the fourteenth amendment as well. McDonald feels Chicago’s gun laws restricted and diminish his and others rights to own and bear arms as given by the second amendment. The fourteenth amendment is also being called into question for McDonald feels the second Amendment should be encompassed by the fourteenth amendment’s Privileges or Immunity Clause.

gun-control

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of McDonald, overruling the prior ruling in the slaughter-house cases, making the second amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights, under the fourteenth amendment’s Privileges or Immunity Clause, extendable to individuals within states. Thirty-three amici curiae briefs were filed; one was signed by 58 senators and 251 representatives, making this the most congressionally supported verdict of all time. The other 32 were filed by stated on their own.

gun-control

This case’s ruling furthered that of the District of Columbia v. Heller ruling protecting people in federal areas within states to extended to all parts of the states by overruling the slaughter-house ruling and stating that the Bill of Rights IS encompassed under the fourteenth amendment’s Privilege or Immunity Clause. The ruling established precedent for farther cases calling infractions of the Bill of Rights into question by extending it to all individuals, within a state not just a federal area.

gun-control

Crime happens everyday all around the United States. Have you ever wondered if there was a reliable way to cut down the amount of crime that is done. A lot of citizens say that guns play a big part in the amount of crime that takes place and some argue against them. Before anyone argues that point, they should know some information about the gun control law in the United States and even in their own states. “Gun control generally refers to laws or policies that regulate the manufacture, sale, transfer, possession, modification, or use of firearms”(“Gun control april 21, 2013″).

gun-control

Personally, I think there should not be a gun control law, but we should make it harder for criminals to get their hands on. Whenever there’s a story on the news that involves an outbreak of shootings or a massacre, people always turn their heads on the gun when in reality, it’s the person behind the gun that operates the entire weapon.

gun-control

There are a lot of citizens that favor instituting a gun control law in hopes to lower the chances of a mass shooting. “Between 1982 and 2012, the US had roughly sixty-two mass shootings. That’s an astonishing number… this research by Mother Jones shows that, of those sixty-two shootings, forty-nine were perpetrated using legal weapons” (“10 Arguments for Gun Control – Listverse”).

gun-control

It would also limit the types of guns you are able to purchase and those you are not. (semi-automatic guns, automatic guns, warfare guns, etc) and it would decrease the amount of stolen weapons that are used in crimes. If the weapon is stolen, it is a lot more difficult for the police to track the gun back to the person who used it. “According to the United States (U.S.) Department of Justice (DOJ), about 1.4 million guns have been reported stolen during burglaries and property intrusion crimes from 2005 through 2010..”(“Pros & Cons: Gun Control – The Pros & Cons”) With this being said, 1.4 million guns will be hard to be tracked down if there’s ever a case where they’re being used for a crime of some sort.

gun-control

People that debate having a stricter gun control law think about the safety of their friends and family if there was less chances of buying a gun. Even though the citizens that debate this side believe the crime rate would decrease tremendously with stricter laws, it is not guaranteed. If a criminal wants a gun, they will find any way to obtain one, even if its done illegally. Imagine a family peacefully hanging out in the living room watching T.V. together and all of a sudden someone breaks in from the back window. The unfamiliar man holds them all at gunpoint. What do they do? The oldest son hears what’s going on in the room nearby but doesn’t have a gun or weapon to safely save his family without the predator seeing him.

gun-control

The son will have to decide whether to risk his life trying to save his family, or hope from a distance his family doesn’t get hurt. People that argue against stricter gun laws believe that guns should be allowed to be used for self defense incase you are ever put into a life-threatening situation. Anyone that was operating the gun should go through the legal procedure to obtain the gun along with have knowledge how to use it properly. The downfall of this is, we don’t know how many people behind those guns are potential criminals and could hurt someone at anytime. “Although guns lead to criminal actions and violence it has also been noted to prevent further escalations in crime. There has been much debate in regards to criminals backing down when faced against civilians and law enforcements using guns as self-defense.” “Pros & Cons: Gun Control – The Pros & Cons”) During the Sandy Hook school shooting, if the principal or kindergarten teacher that died trying to protect the children had a gun on hand, the chances of all those poor innocent children getting killed could have been a lot less. someone could have stopped him before anyone had to get hurt. Aside from guns protecting us, the United States Constitution does not exactly state whether guns can be owned individually or just the military and law enforcements, therefore it stirrs up the debate whether we are able to have them or not.

gun-control

The entire Second Amendment states: “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.” [53] The federal 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, in the Dec. 11, 2012 case Moore v. Madigan, ruled 2-1 that the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms “must be interpreted to include a right to have a concealed gun in public, to have it ready for use, and to have it for self-defense.” [54] The US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Peruta vs. San Diego by a 2-1 vote on Feb. 13, 2014 that the Second Amendment requires states to “permit some form of concealed carry for self-defense outside the home” (“Concealed Guns ProCon.org”). The constitution of the United States of America protects our rights and gives us guidelines to new law making. In 2014, the 2nd amendment will be approximately 223 years old and has been our milestone since the beginning which makes some people not want to have a gun control law.

gun-control

Gun control laws have been a hot debate all around the world. Everyday the latest news constantly shows new crimes involving guns and murders that shouldn’t be happening, from school shootings to break-ins. It may be hard to turn your back against a debate that can affect you more than you think it will. Some people tend to forget that most crime can decrease if the people handling the gun didn’t have such horrible intentions, but that can’t always be promised. Citizens that are for gun control want their U.S. rights and the ability to protect their family at home if they’re ever put into a situation. Meanwhile, people that dont want a gun control law want to protect their loved ones by making it harder for criminals to buy them which would lower the amount of guns on the streets. With this in mind, instituting a gun control law has both its positive and negative depending on the situation and the people behind it.

gun-control

Rich Lowry in “Ignorant Crusade-Gun Control Campaigns Stemming from the San Bernardino Shooting Aren’t Based in Fact” describes the irrational mindset of rampant gun control campaigns in America. Through the utilization of a ridiculing tone, Lowry conveys gun control supporters’ lack of knowledge regarding the issue of gun violence in the country. Within the passage, he explains that gun control supporters “know little about” firearms as a whole and have “no compunction to learn”, about the statistics and fallacies of their stance on the role of legislation regarding guns.

gun-control

His usage of negative connotations exhibits that gun control enthusiasts perpetually push the government for stricter laws on issues that they are not informed about the actual issue and the consequences of enacting legislation. Lowry continues by arguing that stricter legislation on assault weapons is ridiculous due to its violations of the 2nd amendment and its ineffectiveness.

gun-control

Prominently, he points out fallacies of gun control supporters and attacks their substance but ironically provides little substance to support his own premises. Overall, Lowry presents the message that gun control supports run their campaigns based on ignorance. In the LA Times article, “California lawmakers revive gun control ideas after San Bernardino” addresses the current loopholes present in America’s gun control legislation. Through the utilization of multiple perspectives, the author presents that congress only feels the need to address loopholes in the current gun control legislation after a tragedy.

gun-control

As a nation, America understands the need to address the situation of gun violence. He continues by stating that there are bills debated in Congress with the potential solutions to decreasing gun-related incidents across the nation but are being refuted. Additionally, the author provides valid examples including a bill vetoed by Gov. Jerry Brown in 2013 that would’ve “banned semi-automatic rifles” with “detachable magazines”- which would lessen the ammo round in the affected guns. Prominently, in the past, congress has been faced with the simple decision of allowing effective legislation to pass but decides to refute it yet when another tragic shooting occurs, politicians suddenly work to erect solutions but ultimately no resolution is passed- and the cycle perpetually repeats itself. Overall, the article presents sufficient substance and valid examples to illustrate the ridiculous antics of Congress when it comes to resolving the issue of increasing gun violence in America. Both houses of Congress needs to stop alluding to gun legislation as a bi-partisan issue but rather as an epidemic that is affecting thousands of lives in the country in order to ensure the enactment of effective legislation.

gun-control

In the United States, the topic of gun control and violence is very controversial. In the past, guns have caused several negative repercussions in the general public. The author, Nicholas Kristof, talks about this issue in detail in his article “Kristof: Lessons from the Virginia Shooting”. Kristof argues for further protection of guns due to the growing rates of gun violence across the United States. One case that proves this point is the case on Bryce Williams, a famous broadcaster who was found guilty for murdering two of his former co-workers.

gun-control

This incident opened my eyes because it showed me that gun violence is portrayed as a rare occasion, but it continues to happen silently every day. Kristof highlights several issues relating to gun violence in his article. Just like Kristof, I believe that regulations on purchasing guns should have more restrictions and should be regarded very seriously because of the threat that it brings when placed in the wrong hands.

gun-control

The mere thought of children at high risk for death by a gun makes the reader think twice about the morality of certain individuals that live in this country. Kristof then proceeds to talks about broadcaster Bryce Williams, who is known for violently shooting two of his former co-workers, Alison Parker and Adam Ward, in Virginia in response to a massacre in a church in South Carolina.

gun-control

“…an example of how gun violence beget gun violence.” (Kristof). Kristof believes that Williams may have been mentally disturbed because he videotaped the killings and posted them onto a social media platform. However, that does not change the fact that policies on guns are very loose. Kristof introduces certain safety measures that should be taken in order to improve guns. He strongly feels as if the government does that address gun deaths as a serious issue. A couple suggestions the author mentions are passcodes and stern background checks for individuals purchasing guns.

gun-control

Guns can be obtained relatively easily due to the lack of strict screening. Therefore, it can end up in anyone’s possession. As a result, gun violence has been a growing problem in the United States. In middle school, I remember starting to hear about gun violence on the news. I also noticed that mass shootings were occurring more frequently, especially in school settings. Kristof mentions that our firearm homicide rates are 600 times higher than South Korea. He also speaks about gun limitation and reduction. I completely agree with the author and I think that gun limitation is very important. Personally, I think that he was very logical with how he approached the topic of gun control and safety. Kristof mentions many different solutions in order to decrease the amount of gun violence in the United States. He suggests limiting gun purchases to one a month in order to reduce trafficking. I think that through limiting the purchases of guns for one individual, many lives could potentially be saved. The author also states in his article that 92 Americans have their lives claimed by guns daily (Kristof). In my opinion, gun violence is absolutely unacceptable. No individual should live in fear of being shot in their own neighborhood.

gun-control

They should feel safe in their homes and schooling environments. While I attended high school in northern New Jersey, I remember hearing about the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. It was an incredibly terrifying moment for me because the Sandy Hook Elementary School was only an hour drive away from where I resided. Adam Lanza, the shooter who was twenty-two, stole one gun of many in his aunt’s house. Adam had several mental disorders including Asperger syndrome and obsessive-compulsive disorder. He shot twenty children and six staff members in the Sandy Hook Elementary School. Adam also shot his mother on the way to the school and shot himself in the head after the massacre at the elementary school. I was horrified; I never imagined that I would be so closely related to such a devastating incident. I recall hearing about it at school and it was plastered all over the news. There were also memorial services being held for the children and the families affected. The following day, my high school practiced lock down procedures every week in order to be prepare students for the possible event of a shooting. Elementary schools in the county were closed to protect the children from harm’s way.

gun-control

Due to that traumatizing incident, I strongly believe that strengthening the process for purchasing guns is vital. Adam is an exemplar of why background checks and screenings for individuals who purchase guns are necessary. Nicholas Kristof shines light on several flaws of gun security in the United States in his article “Kristof: Lessons from the Virginia Shooting”. I completely agree with the authors opinion and I believe that gun violence could be lessened if the screening of gun purchasers was mandatory. According to the author, more than 33,000 people in America get murdered by being shot every year (Kristof). In order to decrease the high rate of lives lost by guns, I think that guns should be remodeled and improved. Serious measures should be taken in order to protect innocent lives. While smartphones and cars are being improved daily, guns have yet to undergo a drastic advantageous change. I agree with Kristof’s point of view on gun violence and control. Guns can be extremely dangerous weapons if mishandled and I believe that more laws and regulations should be made in order to save the lives of many innocent people.

gun-control

In both articles, there was a lot of disagreement between Trump and Clinton on different topics. In article one, they argued on guns. Trumps wants to run a strong defender of gun rights. On the other hand, Clinton wants to take guns away. She just does not want people to be shot by someone who should not have a gun in the first place. She wants to expand on background checks for gun buyers. In the second article, there were many topics where both candidates disagreed.

gun-control

For an example, in May 2015, a toddle found a hand gun in a car and shot at least 23 people. That is scary. I would feel a lot safer if we took away all guns. In article two I agree with Clinton with supporting the same-sex marriage. People cannot tell a person who they can or cannot love. If two people are in love, they should get married without any law saying they cannot. I did not vote this year because I do not like the candidates that are running for president.

gun-control

Even though I agreed with Clinton’s gun and same-sex marriage point in paragraph two does not mean I want her as president. Clinton has downfalls too. It is important to vote to get your vote count and to make you voice by heard. But I feel like this year everyone is voting for the candidate who they do not want instead of who they do want to become president and that is just sad. Also, I know there is a lot of people not voting because of the candidates who are running. I am scared to see who will become president.

gun-control

The gun control laws are a very controversial topic. To solve this issue there is no right or wrong answer. Not everyone will ever be happy with the rules and regulations of this country. Honestly, I am indifferent. First, I don’t care and second I think it’s too late. Guns have become and shaped our culture as Americans. There are too many loopholes and ways to get around things. Although it’d be incredibly hard, there are things I would about the gun laws if I had the authority.

gun-control

I don’t think anyone should have gun. It’s a little late for that though, a couple hundred years late. We need more things that save and help than kill people. Not everyone in the US can and does have Health Care while it’s possible for every single one of us to have guns. The amount of guns in the United States is significantly higher than the amount of citizens.

gun-control

The craziest people are the ones that you see everyday walking down hallways and streets. They could be the people that you drive by or stand in line behind. When people buy guns, what if they don’t start out crazy and get there? Eventually some people break and there’s noone who can predict the future and be able to say, “Yeah that person is going to go nuts in three years on the twenty-seventh of May and try to shoot up a bank.

gun-control

” Tests are easy to get around, and I would assume especially ones testing sanity. All you would have to do is say the right answer, say what they want to hear. If someone really wants a gun, they will get it and no amount of middle-men, fees, and tests will stop it.

gun-control

The only people who should be able to have guns are the people actively serving in the army at that moment in time. That’s only for safety though. When the soldier comes home it should still be at their base. They should not be able to have it to whip around. This would only work in a perfect world where no civilians have any guns, excluding laser tag guns. A good alternative to bullets in guns would be legos and glitter. Those items would be perfect because legos are horrible to step on and the glitter would confuse the enemy. A war would be won immediately. In the rare event that all guns worked like that, then everyone could have a gun. If someone owns a gun illegally there should be extreme consequences. There is no good that can come from a gun. Guns were made and were evolved to kill and injure. People who own illegal guns should go to jail, simple as that. People go to jail for possession of marijuana, which is illegal, why not illegal guns? Guns are deadlier than drugs and have worse intentions. I would put someone in jail six months for every illegal gun they have and then confiscate them. For people to learn a lesson, the hard hand has to come down. There should be very limited places where a gun is allowed.

gun-control

If soldiers are the only one with guns then the places where it can be taken should not be an issue. Guns would only be taken to the warfront. Besides that, guns don’t really belong anywhere in everyday life. There is no use for a gun in school, church, the grocery store, or office buildings. Having guns would not make anyone feel any safer besides the holder of the gun. Personally, I would feel uncomfortable if I knew that people were walking around Pick N Save with handguns. There should very few guns allowed for civilians. One of which should only be loaded with glitter and legos. Just kidding, but the guns allowed should be small and not have very high fire power. Anymore than that and people are not intending on using the guns for “safety.” Guns can quickly turn into guns that are for killing. If the guns weren’t as high power then maybe they would only injure people. That would make more sense for safety because then you have time to call the police and they can be arrested. Nowadays, some people are gun crazy and the moment they feel their safety threatened they want to shoot. If the guns that those people had were not as high powered then plenty of innocent lives would be saved. In conclusion, I am indifferent about gun control. I am not informed enough to have a specific stand on this policy. I do think that everyone state and federal should have a say on this law though. States know their specific problems and the government can give a general policy that states can expound on. I just hope that whatever the final decision is is in the best interest of the citizens of the United States.

gun-control

Elementary and middle schools ban innocent children from even creating a figure of a gun with their mere fingers, yet mentally unstable adults are allowed to carry guns around as they please. In a nation where even Wal-Mart is selling guns, it is no wonder why these dangerous machines of destruction often fall into the wrong hands. It is evidently clear that the few pros of lean gun control do not substantiate its public danger. Consider today’s generation. The majority also plays video games such as Grand Theft Auto and Call of Duty.

gun-control

However, for many, these games become a reality and give them ideas. They do not understand that what happens in those games is meant to be only for the game. There are a growing number of cases where teenagers and adults alike have reenacted scenes from games such as Grand Theft Auto.

gun-control

To think of society where these types of mentally unstable people have easy access to firearms to fulfill their shooting fantasies in real life makes me fear for the lives of others, as well as my own. There is a surplus of natural and accidental causes of death; America does not need another. What will the generations to come be like? Times change. So will society and people.

gun-control

For example, society has been raising the bar for expectations of students, and it shows no signs of stopping. Is it possible that even elementary students will be stressed under the ubiquitous weight of “college?” Despite what they like to believe, parents, who may be responsible with their own guns, cannot always have complete control over teenagers with raging hormones. Due to their hormones, teenagers are naturally impulsive and a gun is an “easy way out.” This is not only an issue in America, but all over the world as suicide rates of high schoolers have been steadily increasing. Even if a gun is never intended to be used, it still poses a possible danger. By having stricter gun policies, America would be not only be creating a safer environment for the public, but also show the world one solution to lessen the issue of teen suicide.

gun-control

Gateway drugs have been a huge issue for some time now. However America should also consider even hunting guns and a gateway firearm. Becoming comfortable shooting anything would give a person the false impression that shooting person with a handgun is no different. In any situation, prevention is always the best policy. In order to stop the problem at its roots, the government must also look into regulations for hunting guns. Having harsh consequences for not abiding my hunting gun laws will undeniably decrease the possibilities of citizens taking their chances with handguns. The United States of America is notorious for its history of shocking gun-related crimes.

gun-control

From presidents such as Lincoln to hard working students at Virginia Tech, Guns have proven to have done more harm to ALL Americans. It is imperative that the government start to not only raise the qualifications for obtaining guns, but also further enforce these laws. The government must pay more attention to keeping track of registering all guns for the safety of all citizens, from congressmen and women to the civilians who work hard to make this country a better place.

gun-control

Citizens in America are being killed everyday, and many people believe guns are the problem; because of this the government believes implying gun control will help solve this drawback. By doing this the government hopes to lessen crime rates, and suicides. On the other hand, citizens shouldn’t have gun control because it would reduce their protection, many people aren’t killed by guns, and criminals will still find a way to get guns. To begin, the government shouldn’t enact gun control because it would reduce the citizen’s safety.

gun-control

For example, According to NRA, “According to the National Rifle Association (NRA), guns are used for self-defense 2.5 million times a year (“Chris Cox’s NRA Armed Citizen”). The police cannot protect everyone all of the time. 61% of men and 56% of women surveyed by Pew Research said that stricter gun laws would ‘make it more difficult for people to protect their homes and families” (“Why Own a Gun? Protection Is Now Top Reason”).

gun-control

This quote shows that guns play a major role in the safety of people, and by implementing gun control it will make it harder for them to protect themselves. Gun control would most likely cause more deaths of American citizens if they have no way to defend themselves from others. The article continues when it states, “ Constitutions in 37 US states protect the right to bear arms for self defense, most with explicit language such as Alabama’s: ‘every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state!” (Volokh).

gun-control

This statement supports the idea that gun control would hinder people from protecting themselves. Some states allow citizens to bear arms for self defense, and enacting gun control will stop them from doing so. Additionally, gun control is not needed because not many people are killed by guns. The article states, “According to the CDC’s “Leading Causes of Death Reports,” between 1999 and 2013, Americans were 21.5 times more likely to die of heart disease (9,691,733 deaths); 18.7 times more likely to die of malignant tumors (8,458,868 deaths); and 2.4 times more likely to die of diabetes or 2.3 times more likely to die of Alzheimer’s (1,080,298 and 1,053,207 respectively) than to die from a firearm (whether by accident, homicide, or suicide)” (“Data & Statistics”).

gun-control

This shows that gun control would not be very effective if the government believes it will decrease death rates. Mainly because diseases are more likely to kill a person before a gun will. The article continues by reporting that, “Firearms were the 12th leading cause of deaths for all deaths between 1999 and 2013, responsible for 1.3% of deaths…” (“Data & Statistics”). The article explains that firearms are not the main reason why people are dying. Though they are the 12th leading causes of death they are only responsible for 1.3%. 1.3% of 100% is very small causing deaths relating to firearms very low. Finally, gun control should not be implemented because criminals will still find ways around the law.

gun-control

According to The Wall Street Journal, “John R. Lott, Jr., PhD, gun rights activist, stated, “The problem with such [gun control] laws is that they take away guns from law abiding citizens, while would-be criminals ignore them” (Lott). This quote shows how gun control will only affect people who follow the law because those who do not will not care to follow the gun laws. In conclusion, gun control is not necessary because people aren’t usually killed by guns, people will still find ways to get guns, and it will weaken the defense of citizens who want to protect themselves. Gun control will overall hurt the law abiding citizens rather than help them. This will put our nation at risk.

gun-control

Gun control is the regulation that requires people to keep firearms and mostly the guns away from other people (Carter). According to many people, they take it that gun control is an effective manner to help reduce the number of deaths that are continuously being experienced due to wrong use of guns by some people. It is also a fact that many people think that guns are mostly used to carry out crimes that are mostly experienced in towns and in high populated areas.

gun-control

This has since created a negative perception about guns to an extent that the mention of the word gun creates a sense of violence and death in the mind of the audiences. Apart from all these negative perceptions about possession of guns in the society, there is sufficient evidence that this control and regulation is not right owing to the fact that guns are not only used to cause death but they have a role in fighting and dealing with criminals.

gun-control

The wrong use of guns by some people does not mean that guns should not be possessed especially in areas where security details are compromised. In real sense, it is true that guns are not responsible for the many deaths that occur every year as there are other causes of deaths in the society. I think that possession of guns should not be controlled for a number of reasons, mostly for the purpose of improving safety within the society.

gun-control

It is also good if the law allows everybody of sound mind to possess a gun, should there be sufficient information or evidence that their safety is in doubt or that they fear being attacked for some reasons. It is true that gun laws have been established all over in the United State but the specific laws varies from one state to another. It is in these laws that specifications of the minimum age of possessing a gun are indicated and special conditions that determine whether a person qualifies to buy and possess a gun or not. A good example is in Colorado where one is allowed to purchase a gun so long as they have attained 18 years (Carter). In other places, the law requires that you have a hunting license for you to be around to buy and possess a gun. These regulations are not appropriate in the sense that they allow some people to possess guns due to some qualifications while others are locked out. It is for this reason that they have been an emergence of illegal gun businesses in the United States because some of the qualified persons ends up buying the guns and later selling them to those that are not permitted to buy them from registered dealers. It is for this reason that those people who illegally obtain these guns are free to get involved in crimes using the guns because that they will not be traced in an event of crime where they use the guns.

gun-control

They do not fear if the rifles they use are tracked and collected by the police because the firearms are not registered under their names. It is through this regulation that some people who are not allowed to own the guns end up killing those with the guns to take the guns away to use them in the criminal activities. If everybody was allowed to own the guns, the number of those killed by criminals for the purpose of obtaining the guns would be low. The different requirements that come with gun laws are inappropriate in that the United States have different gun laws. This does not sound to be good in that people are allowed to own guns differently despite the fact that they live in the US. This is a form of regional segregation where some people who qualify to own a gun in some states do not qualify in other states. This creates a scenario where security details in some states are continuously improving while the same security is deteriorating in other states (Webster & Vernick).

gun-control

There should be uniformity in these laws where similar conditions for gun possession should be indicated in all states. This will prevent cases where certain people are observed to move from their home states to other states where they qualify to own a gun. This will greatly help to reduce the number of crimes that are associated with immigrants who come in with guns from their countries. There is need to revise the current gun control and the associated regulations especially in the recent times when terrorism is on the rise. It is a fact that terrorists are taking advantage of areas where gun control laws are loose to purchase fire arms which they later use in other areas to kill innocent citizens. They end up using illegal means to have the guns transported to their target countries where they train their soldiers who have since proved to be a great danger in most parts of the world. They end up establishing ties with some people living in states which allow purchase of guns under certain conditions to purchase as many firearms as possible. This is a great threat to the efforts which are being made and the interventions included in the fight against terrorism in the world. Unless the current gun control laws and regulations are revised, terrorism will continue to threaten most parts of the world.

gun-control

There have been a number of cases of people who have ended up in jail after they are caught involving themselves in illegal businesses involving sale of guns. Despite the fact that these people are caught and sentenced, there is need to understand they reasons as to why these people found it easy to get started in this kind of business. One important thing to note is that these people are aware of the regulations that surround gun control which makes it hard for a big number of people to own a gun. Those in this illegal business take advantage of this to exploit their qualifications to own a gun and later selling the guns to those that are not qualified. The illegal sale of guns is a great danger to the society in that the government is not aware of who finally ends up owing a gun. This becomes a problem in case of a crime and there is need to establish the ownership of the firearm that was used. Even after the investigations are carried out, it becomes harder to arrest the victim when it turns out that the firearm is registered under names that are not available in the government databases. To avoid all this, gun control should be lifted to allow citizens to own registered guns so that it becomes easy to trace criminals in case of criminal activity that occurs in the society (Gold). When citizens are aware that they firearms are registered, most of them will avoid using or giving out their guns to be used in criminal activities as they know they will finally be arrested. This is a great deal to help minimize the number of criminal activities in the society.

gun-control

The issue of gun control in America is nothing new to anyone. Everyone has their own opinion as to whether or not we should readily have access to weapons as American citizens. In the words of Ron Paul, a 79-year-old former House of Representatives member, “Respecting the right of the people to keep and bear arms is the original and best homeland security policy. Restricting the right of people to arm themselves leaves them with no effective defense against violent criminals or a tyrannical government.

gun-control

”(Ron Paul, 2014) According to the Second Amendment to the Constitution, we have the right to keep and bear arms. However, over the past few years, there has been an uproar in anti-gun protesting, due to massacres such as the Sandy Hooke Elementary shootings. They all basically have the same approach, “guns kill people, so we should take them away.” This statement is false in every single aspect possible. There are in fact law in place that restrict certain people from owning guns, but making them illegal to own is pointless.

gun-control

Guns do not kill people, people are killed by guns when they fall into the wrong hands. Guns do fall into the wrong hands and that is where they get their bad reputation. But, what happens when you put a vehicle into the wrong hands, say the hands of a drunk driver? According to MADD (Mothers against Drunk Driving) statistics, in 2012, 10,322 people were killed and approximately 345,000 were injured due to drunk driving (MADD, 2013).

gun-control

This means that someone got drunk and chose to get behind the wheel of a vehicle, and killed themselves or others, 10,322 times. However, advocates of controlling drunk driving haven’t suggested taking away vehicles. It is unethical, just like it is unethical to take away guns from people. It took someone to get behind the wheel of that car and drive it while intoxicated, just like it takes someone to pull a trigger. A gun, like a car, is an inanimate object, and only dangerous when put in the hands of someone irresponsible.

gun-control

“Roughly 30,000 people are killed in the U.S. each year by guns—whether by accident, suicide, or homicide according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.” (Funk and Wagnall’s New World Encyclopedia, 2014). In the case of homicides, the blame cannot be placed on the gun itself. When a murder is committed, there is intent; the intent to kill. If a gun were not available, it is almost certain that a homicidal individual would find another way to commit the crime. The same goes for suicide. If an individual is truly suicidal, there are plenty of other ways to end one’s life besides a gun. Guns are convenient, but that is where the problem lies, not guns themselves. Gun-related accidents are typically the result of someone handling a firearm without proper knowledge of the weapon. In fact, most of them are not accidents, but incidents where common sense and safety were not applied. Even in the cases of accidental shootings involving children, it is common sense to store a weapon where a child cannot gain access to it.

gun-control

Last year in California, Governor Jerry Brown signed into a law, which made it a third-degree misdemeanor to knowingly store a loaded firearm in a place where an unsupervised child could likely access it, regardless of whether or not the child actually does (Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, 2013). This bill is one of several that the governor passed to make sure guns are kept away from children. It is laws like this that should be passed to not remove weapons from civilians, but keep them out of the hands of children, and other individuals who are not capable of properly handling a weapon.

gun-control

Whenever a gun is purchased from a place certified to sell weapons, there is a short process. Typically, a person would need a valid driver’s license and a social security number. Based on this information, the store checks with the Federal Bureau of Investigation to see if this person has any restrictions on their record that prevents them from owning a firearm. One example of this would be that, in Louisiana, it is against the law for anyone convicted of certain crimes of violence to possess a firearm for a period of ten years from the date of completion of the sentence, probation, parole or suspension of sentence (NRA-ILA, 2013). If this were the case for someone trying to purchase a firearm, this would be flagged and the store would be required by law to not sell that individual a gun.

gun-control

This is one of many precautions that are already taken involving the dispersion of firearms in America. Guns are not just thrown freely to the public with the message, “Do as You Please.” However, people break laws. Consider all the things that are illegal today, such as marijuana. Incidentally, almost anyone knows someone who uses marijuana and even be able to get their hands on some. The same goes for guns. Even if they were made completely illegal, they would still be here.

gun-control

In conclusion, guns are not the problem in America. A gun is an inanimate object, just as a car is, but put in the hands of the wrong person it can be a deadly weapon. Americans are not running wild, waiting to take down the government with their semi-automatic weapons. Not only is owning a gun a safety measure for some people, but there are recreational activities that involve guns. Plenty of families spend time together shooting guns, as a family activity. Guns have been here since America has been, so have criminals. Get rid of the criminals, not the guns.

gun-control

The laws regarding gun control should be tightened and new laws should be implemented for the safety of our citizens and the image of our country. Recent events relating to mass shootings and terrorist attacks have brought this issue to the table, and there chance of it losing importance is nearly unforeseeable. A fraction of Americans may not understand why this topic is rising in importance. However, the prevalence of debate over gun control was brought to the public’s attention dating back to the 1920’s.

gun-control

During that time, the Federal government was pushed to implement a feries of gun control policies by the waging wars of the gangs of the 1920’s. In 1934, the National Firearms Act was enacted with intent to prevent the spread of destructive firearms that had become increasingly destructive in gang violence. In more recent years passed, the “Gun Show Loophole” has been an issue in which there is a loophole in the laws for obtaining a gun at gun shows, as the name suggests.

gun-control

Many believe in the idea that more gun laws would infringe upon their right to bear arms granted by the Second Amendment. This is not true. The Second Amendment does not grant any person unlimited right to own firearms, as many who are less than fully educated on this topic believe it does. The right of any given person to carry a concealed firearm in public is, and never has been, protected by the Second Amendment. The exact wording of the Second Amendment is, “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.” There is an and in this statement, between “keep” and “bear,” and it was determined in court in 2008 that those rights are indeed separate. In 2008, the Supreme Court clarified that the right to keep a gun is a personal right, meaning the right to own a firearm and keep it in one’s home for any necessary means of self-defense. To bear the arms would mean the ability to present the firearm if necessary to defend yourself.

gun-control

Considering the firearm should be only kept within your household, said firearm should not be “beared” outside of the home, as in public. The topic of self defense has been a go-to for many when defending their right to bear arms outside of their homes. However, based on many statistics, self-defense has rarely been the case for many assaults; even those that have taken place within the home where firearms are intended to be kept. Within the years between 2004 and 2011, 26,618,300 violent crimes were committed. Of this whopping number, only.79% of the victims protected themselves with a firearm or a threat of one. That is less than one percent, which is unbelievably low; it is too low to back the statement, “I need a firearm for self defense. An even larger amount of property crimes occurred (burglary, break-ins, etc.) at 84,495,500 crimes; of these, only .12% made an attempt to protect themselves with the threat or use of a firearm. Gun related deaths would be substantially reduced if gun control was tighter.

gun-control

This is an obvious statement, basic cause-and-effect. There were 464,033 gun-related deaths between the years 2000 and 2013; only 2.2% of these deaths were unintentional. At 66% guns were the leading cause of death by homicide in 2015. A study by Lancet in March of 2016 found that firearm-related deaths could be reduced by a projected 57% if federal universal background checks were implemented. These same background checks for ammo could reduce these deaths by 80.7%, and gun identification requirements would deplete them by 82.5%. Many who oppose stricter gun control laws have similar concerns. A common statement is, “guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” However, if you take the firearm away from a man who has intentions to enter a school and initiate a mass shooting, how will he shoot those people? This statement is ignorant; it is similar to saying “methaphetamines do not kill people, people kill people,” yet if you were to take the fatal factor of the equation, there would be no ability of the person to kill.

gun-control

This is why other fatal objects such as lethal drugs and destructive weapons such as bombs have been strictly illegalized; if they aren’t in the possession of a person, they can’t be used by that person to kill. (Will add more here in final draft!) Firearms should have tighter laws regarding who can obtain them and how easy it is to do so, as well as what kinds of firearms will be legal for an average citizen to have. Guns should not be made completely illegal, because that will result in only criminals obtaining them. However, background checks should absolutely be required to purchase a gun or it’s ammo/counterparts. Firearms that are semi-automatic, not used for hunting, etc., should not be permitted to be in circulation of the general public or sold to them by gun shops.

gun-control

The statistics on the ownerships of these guns are mostly unreliable and unavailable, so it is impossible to know how many of these fire arms are legally owned and how many are illegally hold. When a person intents on doing harm and he/she wants to get a gun, they will either have one already, or will be able to easily get one.

gun-control

-Education about fire-arms and gun safety is needed to prevent deaths; not more gun-control(Con): Almost all of the US gun owners truly believe that children should learn about gun safety. “Guns don’t kill people; people kill people”. Citizens also need more gun education and screening on mental illnesses to prevent horrible actions.

gun-control

So as we now have seen the arguments of both sides, we can clearly state that the issue of gun-control is big and quite controversial. Most of the US citizens don’t want to give up their guns and their main reason is the second amendment. But this is the thing that makes it hard for the pro side, because of the fact, that it is the right of every citizen to obtain a gun.

gun-control

-Buying fire arms should be the same as buying a vehicle: The lawmakers could learn lessons from auto-safety. They could create more thorough requirements for owning fire arms. A policy that would be more effective, would be to require every buyer to obtain a (gun) license that should include registration of all of their purchases and also a training program.

gun-control

Pass laws that really have an effect: Not all of the gun laws are being equally created. The military rifles that are used almost al (mass) shootings may dominate the debate, but they apply for less than 5% of all deaths. Research in 2018, also found that strict fire arm laws in states, such as the background checks for all (private) sales and restrictions on numerous purchases, were identified with lower rates of gun deaths.

gun-control

“Gun control entails laws whose aim is to ensure a limitation in firearms possession. Gun control or gun rights are a very public subject. I’m not a weapons expert; I don’t even own a gun. I have fired a few at a couple at ranges, but just for fun. I would not consider myself proficient with any weapon. I don’t hunt. I do love the outdoors and have seen wildlife up close, but I’ve never had the need to shoot an animal for food or sport.

gun-control

I have never been the victim or the perpetrator of a violent crime or gun related incident. I am a conservative politically and a Constitutionalist. I have read the Second Amendment and I firmly believe the right to self-defense should never be denied. Most importantly, I have tremendous empathy for those that have been the victims (both directly and indirectly) of gun violence. I believe the above-mentioned qualifiers make me uniquely neutral on the subject.

gun-control

Although the issue surrounding it are complex, I believe the public policy on Gun Control is situational and in recent years has been “weaponized” to manipulate specific agendas.The latest mass shootings horrify all of us. Whether it’s a school, a club or a public event, the hopeless circumstances surrounding the situation terrify us. They are our nightmare. This is happening, and I am powerless; I can neither flee nor fight. I have no control over the situation.

gun-control

Sandy Hook, a private/elite elementary school in an upscale suburb of a quiet town in Connecticut; 28 dead. The Borderline Bar in Thousand Oaks, California; a suburban LA college bar; 12 dead. Fort Hood Military Hospital, a secure facility on a well-guarded military base in Texas; 13 dead. An outdoor concert, on the Strip in Las Vegas, with metal detectors, security screenings, and dozens of armed police officers; 59 dead! A guy walks up to a bunch of Congressman practicing softball for a charity benefit game (in Washington DC) with armed Capitol Police watching. The arbitrary nature of these events demonstrates the complexity of this issue. In this immediate gratification world, we live in (smart phones, amazon overnight, inflight wifi etc.) we demand answers and wanted quick decisive solutions by an expert on what I have to do to solve this and move on. There are people on all the news shows telling me that this is simple, they know the answer. And of course it starts with a catch phrase; “if we make guns illegal, only criminals will have guns!” or “they can take my gun… from my cold dead hands!” This triggers the first problem; emotion, emotion complicates everything. We can all agree that gun violence is bad. A kid walking into school and killing other innocent kids is horrible. Right, Left, Conservative, Liberal there is complete agreement that these acts are evil. It’s all over the news, parents screaming in anguish, fellow innocents crying and holding candle light vigils with flowers and stuffed animals.

gun-control

The scene is heartbreaking. These images create three emotions in rapid succession; sorrow, grief and then anger. It’s a new found by product of this immediate gratification technology; Emotion manipulation. It’s why we have become so dependent on the 24 hour news. It manipulates our emotions. It gives us highs and lows. What evokes more emotion than the tragic shooting of innocents. These shootings become a media circus. It sells. Reporters covering these events become celebrities. They move from local to national exposure. There are media experts and analysts that move in, they create excitement and insight into mindset and actions. They create biographies of the tragic victims and they sensationalize the perpetrator. According to the recent studies, there exists evidence shortage regarding the effect of most laws on gun control. However, a study conducted by RAND Corporation (2018) revealed that there exist numerous effects brought about by gun policies.

gun-control

Among the developed nations today, the United States is one of the rare countries where arms rights are inscribed in the constitution. Accompanying the possession and use of firearms, the once-great power of the world is also where gun violence occurs likely every single day, sometimes with catastrophic consequences, such as the latest shooting on February 14, 2018, happened at Marjory Stoneman Douglas (MSD) High School, a former student walked into school and shot 34 people and 14 of them died where others are injured.

gun-control

Because of that mass shooting hundred thousand of people gathered up in Washington D.C to protest about gun violence and bring their hope that the government will stricter about gun control, young children marched, holding hands with their parents. Grandmothers and grandfathers wept as they shouted “Enough is enough!’ Students and teachers carried signs that read ‘Never Again.’ (Tod Olson). There was an election on November, not in Florida but also every state in United States giving their hope that new congress will help for better in gun control and help to stop gun violence in United States.

gun-control

It will be less mass shooting if stricter guns purchase occurs. Americans who were support background checks before individuals purchase guns at guns shows, number who agree with it are 65% and still increasing (Pew Research Center). A survey by the Pew Research Center shows that the United States is in the most intense conflict in the last 20 years. Southerners also strongly support gun ownership. Similarly, large coastal cities on the East and West coasts are vehemently opposed to guns while the Far West, with farm owners, farmers, miners, loggers, and independent groups respect and need guns for various purposes. (Pew Researching center).

gun-control

The number of gun deaths is alarming. Over the past decade, on average, more than 33,000 Americans have died from guns. Two third of them were suicides. About 1,300 victims were killed in domestic violence involving guns- 586 cases by accident, 11,000 homicides, and hundred killed by shooting. Mass shootings have become deadlier and seem to happen frequently. From 2000 to 2015 the numbers of shootings have increase more than doubled- there are four out of five incredible deadliest shootings had happened in past five years that shaken American History. Beside that 2017 is the year where most of the mass shootings that had big casualties take place compare to any years (Wall Street Journal).FBI shows that because the mass shootings increasing from the straight line from 2000 then from 2013 the shootings have increased dramatically we can call it as a “ rising trend”, where the shooters follow the trend when there are more and more (FBI). The FBI have shown how the mass shootings growing big from 1982 until now in figure 1 and the figure has shown 2017 is the year of mass shootings.

gun-control

Up to 42% of Republicans have at least one gun while only 16% of Democrats are armed. While 56% of Republicans think that more armed Americans will reduce crime levels, the opposite is true, only 15% of Democrats have this viewpoint, while 51% think criminals will increase if more Americans have weapons.73% of the Republican think individuals should carry guns while 26% of Democrats agree with it.75 % of Democrats and only 24 % of Republicans consider gun control regulations to be tighter (Baxter Oliphant). Both Republican and Democrat think guns control is a big modern problem in United States. Nearly two-thirds of Democrats agree there would be fewer mass shootings in the U.S. if it were stricter for people to legally obtain guns; only about a one-fourth of Republicans agree with it (Baxter Oliphant).

gun-control

According to the New York Times, the NRA was founded on November 16, 1871, a not-for-profit American gun advocacy organization based in Fairfax, Virginia. The main objective of this organization is to encourage people to use guns on a scientific basis (“World Malayalee Council”). Not just a non-profit organization, the NRA is invading the political arena to fight gun control laws in the United States ( The New York Times).In 1934, the NRA established a Legislative Branch composed of many analysts and former politicians to analyze, evaluate and evaluate upcoming bills, after the National Arms Act was adopted in 1934.In the 1970s, the NRA focused primarily on shooter shooters, hunters to undermine the Gun Control Act of 1968. In 1975, the NRA established the NRA Acting Institute for Legislators formed a powerful coalition with politicians to ‘protect the American gun culture”. The NRA still exists and supports gun ownership and is always looking for ways to counter gun control laws, many mass shootings will occur like the mass shooting Las Vegas (The New York Times).

gun-control

US President Donald Trump said on October 1 that the government would need only a few weeks to officially approve the bump stock regulation. Before that on February 22,2108 trump has tweeted on twitter-he claims, “I will be strongly pushing Comprehensive Background Checks with an emphasis on Mental Health. Raise age to 21 and end sale of Bump Stocks! Congress is in a mood to finally do something on this issue – I hope!”.

gun-control

One of the writers who wrote about the gun violence is Thomas Gaber with his best known work named “ America’s Gun Violence Problem”. He describes how American faced with many witness mass shooting in the past few years. He assert, “ Over the last few years, our country has witnessed mass shootings in schools and on college campuses, in workplaces, movie theaters, places of worship, nightclubs, and shopping malls”. He also strongly support on the way to reform the guns laws(pp.1). Thomas believes because the number of ownership still increase so it is easy to understand that there will be many serious incidents will occurs are undeniable. American take over the world in privately guns ownership and the number estimated is 31% while American population just accounting for less than 5% of the world (pp.11). The number of home succide by guns in American is dramatic, the number of murdered my firearms is at least three times in other country(pp.14). Thomas claims, “Higher gun availability in the USA is likely an important factor in the choice of guns over other means of killing. The cost of having many availably guns in America is to expensive so each of the citizens should take a action now for our better America.

gun-control

Roughly 30,000 people are killed in the U.S. each year by guns—whether by accident, suicide, or homicide—according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(Funk & Wagnalls New World Encyclopedia). In comparison to other developed countries, firearms in the U.S. are very loosely regulated. In many European countries, for example, gun ownership requires a license from the police. In Japan possession of firearms by the general public is forbidden by law. In Canada, where registration of handguns has been required since the 1930s, a federal law requires the registration of all guns, including rifles and shotguns, with mandatory background checks and a mandatory gun safety course for gun owners(Funk & Wagnalls New World Encyclopedia).

gun-control

Praise and worship at your local church or synagogue, singing out loud at your favorite concert, dancing like no one is watching at a night club or simply attending school like most adolescents in this country. How about getting some fast food dinner at McDonalds after an exhausting day at work? All of these public places are scenes for horrendous acts of violence involving guns; mass shootings. Does the pen write the poem? Or is it the poet that uses the pen to express his or her words on paper? An enlightening list of “The deadliest mass shootings in modern US history” can be found on a link from CNN (2018).

gun-control

Most of these places being the last that one would think he or she would spend their final moments on earth. I believe less government involvement in gun control is key to keeping our 2nd amendment intact, following the Libertarianism ideology and using the contractualist theory, to refrain from the infringement of our rights our forefathers set out for citizens more than 223 years ago.

gun-control

“People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others,” coming straight from the Libertarian platform of principles and beliefs. This is what happens when the “majority” rules over all American people. The government is in place to serve the American people, not to serve as a hidden agenda for radicals trying to impose things such as One World Order, for example.

gun-control

What would this mean for criminals and non-law abiding Americans? Time and time again, it is repeat felons and criminals that seem to thrive where others obey and succumb to laws and regulations. Roughly 97.8% of mass shootings continue to occur in gun-free zones” (Crime Prevention Research Center,2018). This is great foresight into what our future would look like if it became criminal for American citizens to possess firearms. Kurtzleben, D. writes that “Chicago, being one of the cities where you can find the strictest of gun laws, had a staggering over 4,000 victims of gun related crimes last year alone.” (Kurtzleben ,2017,para.3).She goes on to describe that state lines don’t stop guns, and that bordering states with less strict gun laws like Wisconsin and Indiana, keep criminals well stocked with guns. The staggering comparison between Chicago’s population of 2.716 million people had a gun homicide rate for 2016 of 25.1% per 100,000 residents, while New York’s population of 8.623 million had only 2.3%. We can use this information as insight as to when non law abiding citizens want what they want, they will achieve it by any means necessary. Let’s not even mention black market sales that would not cease to exist with or without government involvement of gun control.

gun-control

The Supreme Court unanimously held the prohibition of sawed off shot guns in 1939.(Stevens,2018,para. 4)The government extremists jump from regulating to trying to repeal the amendment itself entirely. In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled against repealing the 2nd amendment in Heller v District of Columbia. Well known contractualist John Locke made a point to note how the state of nature was not bad, but citizens needed to secure their property. (Roskin, M. G., Cord, R. L., Medeiros, J. A., & Jones, W. S.,2017). A long standing way to secure ones property is with their right to bare arms, if we lose that right, who or what is to stop the unlawful people from taking what they want, when and how they want, whether it results in the loss of a life or not. Contactualist believe in the “social contract”, our primary contract being the Constitution. In an article written in the New York Times by former Supreme Justice, John Paul Stevens, he insists that demonstrators “seek more effective and lasting reform”, by demanding a repeal of the 2nd amendment. Ironic how a former Supreme Court Judicial, whose responsibility was to interpret whether legislations proposed fall within the lines of the Constitution, would welcome such ideas that entertain criminal behavior in itself. The highest law of the land, the Constitution, is to be upheld by the Supreme Court, not undermined by it.

gun-control

Libertarians seek a “world of liberty, a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives”. Contrasting to Chicago’s strict gun laws prohibiting firearms, in a small town just outside Atlanta Georgia’s city limits, a place named Kennesaw, mandated in 1982 that ‘every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm.” (Jimenez,2018,para.7) While this is in fact a law in this town, not all home owners do own a gun, and it is not enforced by the police. The law was enacted in 1982 to act as a crime deterrent, and with the violent crime rate below 2%, and a total of one murder in the last six years, id say the crime deterrent was a success. Criminals usually prey on the weak and venerable, but in a town where it is the law to possess a gun, statistics show that the possibility alone of a person with a gun steers criminal acts away. “Government force must be limited to the rights of individuals to life, liberty and property.” Libertarian stance on crime and justice, how would one defend these rights against wrong doers if they lost their inherent right to bare arms? They would be at the liberty of the non-law abiding citizen with the illegal gun, if there was success in repealing the 2nd amendment. Not to mention, it being our last line of defense if our government turns against its people with a well-armed militia of their own.