One of the major points against gun control is the violation of your second amendment rights, you have the right to keep and bear arms for personal protection. This paper will show there is no common sense in banning all firearms as a means gun control and it leaves law abiding citizens increasingly vulnerable to violent crimes. No Common Sense in Gun Control Over the past forty years, legislators have spent a lot of time, effort and revenue on legislation regarding gun control. Gun control advocates insist that increased gun control will lower the soaring crime rates of the early 70's. However, “recent research on the prevalence of defensive gun use has prompted growing concern that government efforts to regulate gun ownership and use may be counterproductive” (Ludwig, 2000, p. 363).
Moore expresses in his documentary that Canada and America has a similar number of firearms but Canada has a substantial number of fewer gun related deaths. Every country has guns but no country has as many deaths from guns like America does. The only explanation Mr. Moore can come up with is that Americans are generally more afraid, more uptight, and more chaotic than the rest of the world. The gun related deaths in America usually come from situations of fear, chaos, and stupidity. No other country in the world kills their own people from guns like America does, but they all have a substantial amount of guns just like America does.
Gun casualties and incidents throughout the country have woken the public up from its ignorance and shown them the danger guns can pose to society (Martinez, 2013). While some people want a complete blanket ban on the ownership of guns, others wants an easier access to guns so that every person may look after their own security. Part of what makes the term gun control a very controversial topic is that it’s used in a ambiguous way that does not explain the details of the issue and the demands, apart from literally controlling guns. The two prominent sides of the debate are the groups who ask for liberal gun laws that make it easier for a person to procure guns and conversely, there are groups who want to repeal the second amendment. I personally am a strong believer that an “ideal society” should have no guns; nevertheless crime is a big problem to the citizens of our society and guns are necessary.
What does this mean? What it means is that guns balance the power between the strong and the defenseless, making it more difficult for the strong to overcome the susceptible. III. Getting rid of guns does not get rid of violence. Some people think that if we just get rid of guns, violence will lower dramatically.
“The United States has the dubious honor of having the highest rate of homicide and suicide by gun among developed countries, and guns are the leading cause of death for people ages 10 to 24. In 2001 alone, nearly 30,000 people died from gun wounds.” (Sifry and Watzman 312) Currently, 71% of homicides and 61% of suicides are firearm- related in the United States. It should make sense that a country, with much stricter laws, should have low rates of homicides and accidental killings. “After a much smaller school-yard massacre in Scotland, the United Kingdom parliament did just that. It is not illegal in the UK to own a handgun, and the gun killings have stopped.” (Robinson 318) People have to understand that anyone can be eligible of owning a handgun, and it can fall in the wrong hands of a
Compared to the UK where 648 murders where only 58 were caused by firearms. Using the USA is not a good example to USA as we know that they have more guns and easier access to firearms than here in the UK, so guns are going to play a bigger part in their culture than us. Looking at mainland Europe, taking Spain as an example their Police force is armed and their crime rate is The second part of my argument, is protecting the Police officers, also in my view, there is no point in arming them. The UK already have use of non-lethal weapons for assistance, mainly CS spray and taser guns. These allow the Police officers to disable the violent of dangerous suspects, without having to use a lethal method of force.
That's one reason why violent crime is often highest in places with the toughest anti-gun laws. Compare that failure with the success of dozens of states that, since 1987, have passed laws allowing licensed law-abiding adults to carry firearms for protection. In each of those states, violent crime fell after the "right-to-carry" was adopted. “The National Center for Policy Analysis, a non-profit conservative think tank, reported the following statistics: In 1976, Washington,
However, there are many strategies that can be used to prevent gun violence like: passing gun laws and enforcing them, spreading information about gun violence, and performing thorough background checks. There are many reasons why gun violence is a big issue in this country, one of them being that there aren’t many gun control laws being enforced. If the government were to pass more gun laws and enforce them the crime rate would go down. Author Thomas C. Frohlich says in the article States with the Most Gun Violence that “The overwhelming trend is that strong gun law states have seen dramatic declines in violence. Weak gun law states have not seen the same decline.” It’s obvious that the strong gun law states are doing something right if they see a decline in violence, they must be enforcing gun laws and controlling the gun distribution in their states.
Grifin M. Price Kendra Gallos English III H 3/21/18 Gun Control Will Not Solve Anything Guns are given a bad reputation because of the terrors that can be committed by people who want to cause harm. Those who are gun control advocates wish to ban certain weapons without basis, ban certain weapon attachments, and restrict the rights of the second amendment. Gun control supporters base their opinion on statistics about gun violence that use a portion of data that is not about gun violence just to boost the value of the number. Supporters of gun control dismiss the saying “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” because they are misinformed about the number of defensive gun uses (DGU) which far outnumbers the
However, the pro-legalization Americans respond in saying increased marijuana use has no lasting health effects, legalization will allow for better regulation of distribution, and marijuana legalization will reduce alcohol consumption in America. There is no empirical data to support that marijuana use will increase when legalized or that we will see an increase in automobile crashes. Those who are not necessarily marijuana users but support legalization argue that the financial benefits of legalization outweigh the negative implications that come with