So gun control is not the answer to the problem. Law Enforcement needs to crack down on criminals and the illegal sales of firearms to help elevate the problems with the death or homicide rate. The normal everyday work class people do not need to be punished for the acts of criminals and drug dealers. If gun control were to take effect and guns were outlawed it would still not solve the problem at hand. It wouldn’t solve the problems because only the outlaws
Eliminating the second Amendment will make it harder for law-abiding citizens to protect themselves against psychos with guns. The first reason why citizens should be allowed to have guns for self defense on the street and in their homes is the fact that police are not required to protect every individual. The former Florida Attorney General Jim Smith told Florida legislators that police responded to only 28.57% of calls for help to Dade County authorities. He was asked why so many citizens in Dade County were buying guns and he responded, “they d*** well better, they’ve got to protect themselves.” The Department of Justice discovered that in 1989 there were 168,881 crimes of violence which were not responded to by police within one hour. On average it takes 15-30 minutes for police officers to get to a crime scene.
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. Therefore, it is not recommended that we ban guns completely. The most pragmatic thing to do is to reduce the availability of guns and make it difficult to procure them by making sure that they are given only to people who are mentally capable of handling them. There is a definite need to ban guns since their liberal usage leads to large-scale public massacres, which are suited for the field of war, not civilized society. Weapons like automatic rifles and assault weapons are tools created with the purpose of mass killings.
Sense I have been around a variety of weapons through my life I have seen the devastation first hand that a bullet can do to both targets and game alike. If a weapon that is being used to kill people in war why should we be allow such a weapon in homes across America? A good friend of my family’s is a police officer and has explained to me that if someone were to fire at him with an automatic rifle he would have no real way to fight back because a pistol is no match for an assault rifle and the standard issue shotgun does not shoot as far as an assault rifle bullet can shoot so he is outgunned and has no real defense. It poses a threat to police officers and to citizens alike. A bullet that can go through a deer but also be shot 400 rounds per minute such as the AK-47 should not be allowed to own by a citizen.
The new laws have provided an avenue to get back to our roots and protect our rights. Gun laws only limit the good guys and the bad guys don’t get their guns from a store, they come from the street and many people will die in the street if they can’t defend themselves.
Politicians have stated thy will introduce new laws wanting tougher background checks, forced registration, and outright banning of military looking firearms. All these types of new laws will cut down on crime and make this country a safer place. But I believe the way to protect against a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun. First of all on the issue of it will cut down on violent crime, who are they kidding criminals rarely obey laws; studies show most criminals acquire guns through friends or theft. Adam Lanza the shooter at Newtown stole the guns he used from his mother.
Amongst all the stories swirling around in the media following the Sandy Hook tragedy it may surprise one to discover that handguns, not assault weapons, are used in most of the gun murders in the United States. Despite this many in Congress are pushing to bring back the Clinton-era ban with some extra restrictions and requirements. Although I can understand how frustration and grief following such horrific events can push people to call for action, I do not think that banning certain types of semi-automatic rifles or limiting their magazine capacity will do anything to stem the tide of death. The first hurdle that politicians seeking a new assault weapon ban will have to face is defining what exactly an assault weapon is. Most of the time
They government is emphasizing more on the fully automatic weapons, explosives, armor and other things that only the military should have access to. Some people do not see that the violence taking place in the U.S. has to do with the access to guns and the mental health of the individual. The people who are victims to some of the most recent shootings should speak up and tell others why we need to make obtaining these types of weapons much more difficult. Many individuals choose what they want to see, hear and believe, as in seeing the massacres happen and believing the government is taking their right away and not letting them have what they have the right to have, which is “the right to bear arms.” Most citizens do not see that making further background checks and regulation on the amount of ammunition that is
Gun Violence is a problem in the United States as well as in our community. So now we need to find a way to control gun violence. Guns themselves, however, are not the case of the violence, and gun control will do nothing to decrease violent crimes. People who decide to kill will find a way to kill even if they do not have access to guns. Therefore, guns cannot be singled out and blamed for all of gun control.
Gun laws pertaining to schools prevent people from saving more lives and stopping shootings in the making. The Virginia Tech shooting in 2007 goes down in history as the worst school shooting in U.S history. Seung-Hui killed “32 unarmed students on the campus of Virginia Tech” (McGrath), taking his time to go through the building as he “had no expectation that a fellow student or a faculty member might shoot back”(McGrath) thanks to Virginia Tech’s gun-free zone. If Virginia Tech hadn’t had that law, people like Tracy Bridges would have had their guns on them, saving some students that could be alive today “instead of having to sprint to their cars in distant parking lots.” (McGrath).The same happened in1997 when Luke Woodham, then 16, used and action rifle to kill two students and wound seven others at his high school in Pear, Mississippi. Joel Myrick heard the shots and sprinted to get his .45 that was “Prohibited by law” (McGrath) onto campus.