Gun Control Argument

1414 Words6 Pages
Is Gun Control The Answer? "’Make no mistake -- they're coming for our guns. And we freedom-loving gun lovers are totally defenseless! Other than, you know, the guns’ -Stephen Colbert” (Kurtzman 1). There are as many people who advocate for pro gun laws as the people who are opposed, which is the reason why gun control has become one of the most controversial topics as of right now. America is truly split between those who advocate for gun control and those who are opposed. In this controversial debate, background checks are another point to consider. Background checks are defined as “checks on any private transfers of guns” (West Coast Publishing 11). This similarly debated topic is a large part of the gun control debate. The second amendment…show more content…
The Second Amendment is not an unlimited right to own guns. When the constitution was drafted in 1787, the United States didn’t have an organized military, so local militias were a necessary safety measure. Now, however, local militias aren’t necessary. To further prove this point, many people have said that “In modern times, the amendment should only protect the states rights to arm their own military forces” (Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection 1). Another big concern that many people have had with the second amendment is whether or not the amendment is truly constitutional. There are arguments from both sides of this debate, and each side brings up very valid points. However, the main point to remember in this argument is “as long as any government regulation applies to everyone equally, they are constitutional” (West 1). Another colossal factor when talking about the second amendment is whether or not local governments are allowed to have their own gun restrictions or permits. Furthermore, the second amendment allows for state and local governments to issue permits, “allowing for local governments to adopt gun restrictions”(Annenberg Classroom 1). If a state or local government allows for permits to be issued, then the local and state governments should be able to restrict guns too. After all of these facts being laid out on the table, it is clear…show more content…
However, this claim can be easily refuted. In fact, a study from Gifford’s Law Center has shown that “from 2009 to 2012, states that required background checks on all handgun sales or permits had 35% fewer gun deaths per capita than states without that background check requirement” (Gifford’s Law Center 1). Additionally, if these gun restrictions are put into use, then unlicensed dealers will begin to realize that they can be caught and prosecuted for not having a selling license. It has been proven “using 2004 data, around 18% of gun transactions involved private sellers, buyers’ family or friends or ‘other’ sources… a majority of these sources were not licensed dealers” (Badger 1). If the government can put gun restrictions into action, then that 18% will be lowered considerably. Also, once a universal background check system is implemented, it will be easier to enforce because it will become the new normal. This quote proves this point that “Enforcement of background checks are possible, especially when they become the norm. There is no reason why gun shows and private gun owners will not begin to follow the laws once they are enforced” (West Coast Publishing 23). Therefore, the claims made by the opposing side are

More about Gun Control Argument

Open Document