(Jordan).This means that the people of the United States have the right to own firearms and that this right shall not be taken away. We must defend our right to bear arms, or we will go defenseless. Those who support gun control say that taking guns away from the public will lower crime rates. In 1996 Australia past laws banning most guns and made it a crime to use a gun in self-defense. After those laws were passed the number of armed robberies rose by 51%, unarmed robberies rose by 37%, assaults rose by 24%, kidnapping rose by 43%, murders may have fallen by 3%, but manslaughter rose by 16% (“Section 7: Three Common Gun Control Myths”).
In fact, the thirty one states that follow the “shall issue” laws (the law to conceal weapons) “have on average, a twenty four percent lower violent crime rate, a nineteen percent lower murder rate, and a thirty nine percent lower robbery rate than states that forbid concealed weapons.” The nine states with the lowest violent crime rates all have right to carry laws. (http//:www.cato.org) Gun control laws do not work; it is not a theoretical statement, but a statistically proven one. Despite it being an incredibly corny line: “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people,” or “When guns are outlawed, only the outlaws will have guns.” These statements are essentially true; saying that a gun kills a person is like saying that the car, not the drunk driver, drove itself into a head on collision with a school bus. It is true however, that the person yielding the gun is the killer, not the gun itself. For fucking Christ’s sake it’s an
The result has been an 18% reduction of out nation’s aggravated assault plus robbery rate.” (Menkus) this shows people that the more good citizens you have with guns the safer it is for the rest of the people. The problem is not the gun itself but the people who use it and commit these terrible crimes. If more people could be responsible with guns the world could be a safer
There are definitely pros and cons for individual(s) being able to have a concealed weapon but in this case I am for people being able to carry a concealed weapon. Criminals are less likely to target a person if they know that person is armed. Second I don’t feel the government can 100 guarantees the safety of all of its citizens. Third reason why is criminals are going to carry a concealed weapon legal or not. So why shouldn’t law abiding citizens be able to do the same and be able to protect themselves.
Gun accidents have been declining as Wilson writes, “the rate of fatal gun accidents has been declining while the level of gun ownership has been rising” (Barnet and Bedau 126). Fewer than 2 percent of gun fatalities are caused by someone mistaking the victim for an intruder. The facts do not support the self-injury argument. Gun control advocates need to understand that they should use correct facts in their arguments if the hope to maintain credibility. People against gun control that want tougher laws on gun related violence will most likely see those added laws overlooked because the tougher laws will most likely be an add-on to current laws.
Docs Google+ Gmail Calendar more All DocsEdit thesis and body paragraph Thesis statement for research paper Firearms have reduced the crime and death rate among citizens because it allows them to protect themselves and adding more gun legislation will only hinder their right to self defence thus making them more vulnerable to crime and death. Body paragraph 3 Countries that enforced strict gun laws and even banned certain types of firearms have seen an increase in crime and death, while at the same time making it nearly impossible for their citizens to protect themselves. Rates of crime and violence have been on the rise in countries that have banned or made it very difficult to obtain firearms by lawful citizens . This has been
Does allowing concealed weapons stop the violence? Maybe not but more innocent citizens may not lose their lives to criminals who carry illegal weapons. Gun Control for Concealed Weapons The death toll to gun
In addition, field studies were conducted in Portland and Vancouver to prove the effectiveness of gun control. The two cities are several hours apart by car, similar culturally in many ways, and have similar crime rates. However, guns are strictly regulated in Vancouver; turns out the people of Portland are at six times greater risk of being murdered with a gun than those in Vancouver (Moorhouse and Wanner, 5). Clearly handgun regulation works; when Washington D.C banned the sale of handguns, the murder rate dropped considerably, twenty-five percent (Moorhouse and Wanner, 9). This evidence indicates that tough firearm legislation would cause a drastic drop in the number of deaths involving
Can gun control laws reduce the amount of gun violence? The clear answer is yes. First, the suicide rate will lower if we enact more gun control laws. Next, making people undergo background checks before owning a gun will help lower the risk of a firearm ending up in the hands of a criminal or a person with mental illness. Third, there will be more gun deaths if it is easier to obtain
For instance, the criminal will think twice before killing for fear of receive the strongest punishment. Death penalty actually is not an effective crime deterrent. This is because majority of people do not anticipate they will be caught. Some states in the United State such as New York, Hawaii, Alaska and Michigan do not use the death penalty had proved they had lower murder rate than the states that do. For example in 2004, crimes rate for states do not use the death penalty had 4.08 murders per 100000 inhabitants compare to states use death penalty had 6.32 murders per 100000 inhabitants.