However, they support strict laws against gun-related crimes and better enforcement of those laws. On the other hand, those who support gun control are of the opinion that background checks are necessary to keep arms out of reach from the convicted and the mentally ill. Americans can lie somewhere between the two points of view. The Case for
If more people know the pros and cons of the facts about firearms, they will reconsider their opinion on not only the possession of a firearm, but its usage as well. This brings up the topic of concealed carry. The official definition of “concealed carry” is the practice of carrying a weapon in public in a concealed manner. (Either on one’s person or in close proximity.) Although this does pose a security threat, it would be the solution to many of the crimes that are committed.
Robert Townsend Robin Lyons ENG 1113 4/11/13 The Problems with Gun Control Our nation currently is undergoing discussions to change its gun control laws. People on both sides of the discussion have their own opinions on what should be done to solve the problem. I see merits from both sides. However, I believe there should be more effort to address the issues of mental illness partnered more effort placed on convicting people that commit crimes with guns rather than trying to control legal gun ownership. I believe that gun control laws do not prevent crime; they just restrict legal citizens from protecting themselves.
(McGovern, 212, p. 496) Fundamental or not there is a need for regulations for gun control without infringing on citizens right to bear arms. More attention needs to be focused on the individual committing the crimes and not necessarily on the tools they used to commit the crime. Yes the gun may have been behind the mass tragedies but it did not act on its own. There had to be some party behind the gun and that is who needs to be looked at. With all the laws, rules, and regulations already in place in regards to firearm, these heinous crimes are still being committed and those that should not have access to or should not be purchasing firearms still do.
The main topic is however, should other people besides the police be able to carry and own a gun. I can say that we would all agree that guns or any type of weapons are not wanted in "just anybody's hands". However, this is the very reason we need to be able to protect ourselves. There are people in this world that are not mentally stable, and if they want to have a gun, they will have a gun whether obtained legally or illegally. This knowledge alone should make people understand why everyone should be allowed, at least given the opportunity to own a gun.
Q: In your opinion, which non-lethal tool on a police officer’s belt, either the taser, pepper spray, or the night stick, is best for handling the most dangerous suspects in a confrontation? A: I think all officers have under gone training to make that decision during confrontation depending on the threat to the individual, themselves and the public. All weapons can do damage if misused it’s up to training institutions to provide proper education and the officers themselves to use their discretion. Q: Do you think tasers are too powerful to be used to disarm or bring down a suspect? If yes, what if it was a last resort instead of using the gun in a non life-threatening situation?
In reducing crime, gun control ends up being an accommodating approach to diminish diverse sorts of brutal law violations, diminish firearm identified mischances, and manage the offering of guns. Gun control assists manage the thought that Americans will misuse the option to remain battle ready. It likewise helps the administration stay informed regarding whom possesses a gun. Gun control is an imperative approach to help keep criminals from perpetrating wrong
With a law requiring that every gun be registered and require transfer of registration when privately sold, criminals would have a difficult time obtaining an untraceable firearm. Limits on ammunition purchases and ammunition held by an individual are not currently tracked leaving individuals an opportunity to stock pile or sell ammunition to others. A system to track ammunition purchases would allow the government to track purchases over time alerting the authorities to possible criminal activity. Setting limits on individual purchases of ammunition would also be a positive move in the gun control arena to prevent large purchases that could be a red flag for pending criminal activity.
Not only do guns pose an imminent physical and mortal threat to the youth of America, but those do not end up dead of scared are often forced into situations that causes them to wind up in prison. There is no safe haven from gun violence. They go over what we as family members, friends, or citizens can do to protect our future and the ones we
“Three Strikes” or Habitual Offender Comprehensive Exam Whitney Polen CJ 602: Comprehensive Examination Kaplan University July 31, 2014 Dr. Patricia Drown Introduction The “three strike”/habitual offender’s legislation needs to be consistent through all of the states. What it will take to understand why some offenders feel they need to repeat this criminal activity, having legislation that will work against these repeat offenders, because not all states are on board with the three strike law. Once someone is labeled a habitual offender and they commit a crime there are increases in the penalties they can be assessed. The type of crimes these offenders commit can also be ranked in a more serious class than if a first time offender had committed it. The sentencing can also add more time when a habitual offender commits a crime.