Gun Control is Not the Answer For many years now gun control has been a major issue. Many, individuals believe that if guns were strictly controlled that it would greatly reduce the amount of crime in the U.S. Although, this may be true it is not the answer to the problem. Stricter control of firearms is an infringement on all individuals Second Amendment rights. Not, only is it an infringement on peoples Second Amendment rights, it will also punish hunters and sportsman whom us firearms to hunt for enjoyment.
The argument is usually the same: one side insists that if officials eradicated guns, thus abolishing the Second Amendment, gun violence will somehow go away. Contrarily, the pro- gun side argues that this invades our rights as humans to protect ourselves. It seems ironic that a debate about the morality of building and owning bombs doesn’t flare when a mass bombing kills dozens, sometimes hundreds. For the argument of fairness, one could suggest that purchasing the materials to build a bomb of any kind could be punishable by law regardless of knowing the intent of the individual. Just as a law abiding American citizen seeking to purchase a gun might potentially be prosecuted if the Second Amendment is dropped from the Constitution.
GUN RIGHTS VS. GUN CONTROL I am in favor of gun rights, and am anti-gun control. Our fore-fathers were in favor of gun rights as well; so much that it was written as the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right of individual Americans to keep and bear arms regardless of service in a militia. It was adopted on December 15, 1791; making it part of the first 10 amendments which are known as The Bill of Rights.
There is not an objection concerning the validity of gun violence, but that is and needs to be seen as an entirely separate issue. It is our right as Americans to bear arms as it has been since our very existence, but that does not mean that by taking our rights away will absolve our country of this issue. John Lott has exceptionally demonstrated the true power of research and statistics. Before coming to a conclusion by opinions that sway an individual or society one way or the other it is imperative to do the research. Lott explains the importance of this in his message to his readers.
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).
Gun control laws do help prevent this from happening as often. Not every individual should be allowed to own a gun, especially people who want to cause harm to others. Plenty of people who are law abiding citizens, and follow gun law regulations, feel as though they are punished for people’s violent actions. An example of a group of people who are against gun control laws are the members of the National Rifle Association. (Scalia, 2011) In states like California, the gun violence is one of the biggest problems the citizens and government officials face on a daily basis.
Gun control has been a debated issue for years. The majority of citizens believe that if gun control is strictly enforced it would rapidly reduce the crime levels. Many innocent citizens feel they have the right to bear arms for self-defense, or even for the pleasure of hunting. To enforce gun control throughout the nation means violating a person’s Constitutional Rights. Some people feel that the issue of gun control will limit crime and the fact that guns are necessary for self-defense against crime, and that enforcing gun control is a violation against a citizen’s second amendment right to bear arms.
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.
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 Control refers to the control in ownership of firearms by citizens. The policy is meant to ensure that there are lesser guns in the population and thus reduce the probability of crimes related with guns. Several States have implemented this policy but the strictness of the policy varies from State to State. Its effectiveness in reducing crimes is, however, still in doubt as crimes continue to occur with fewer registered guns being implicated in crimes. According to Cook and Ludwig, the U.S has over 200 million firearms in private hands (Cook & Ludwig, 1996).