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
However, controlling the distribution and sales of registered guns and owners is necessary because of the criminals that use for them for violence and the homicide rates we have in this nation today. The purchasing and owning of guns and the purpose they are used for should be under control to prevent crimes of passion, reduce accidental deaths that involve handguns, and minimize gun related suicide. There are many sound reasons firearms should be controlled in the United States (Gun Control Facts 2013) Benefits of Gun Control One of the more important reasons guns should be controlled in the United States would be to reduce the number of crimes of passion. A crime of passion usually involves last minutes hasty decisions involving gun fire. Many people are shot following or in the result of verbal confrontations.
More gun control laws will fix this and make it significantly harder for bad people to obtain guns. Others may think that it is an invasion of privacy to make people undergo background checks before obtaining a gun. Indeed, for a few people, background checks will be considered an invasion of privacy. However, it is very necessary. If there were not any background checks before owning a gun, it is possible for a terrorist or criminal to acquire a gun, like they can right now.
However, the reality is that criminals will find a way to break gun laws and get guns illegally. Therefore, to protect ourselves from becoming a victim of these criminals, we need to be able to own and use a gun to protect ourselves when absolutely needed. For example, if a criminal was to break into my home with a gun in their hand,
Both sides have very interesting arguments that make them seem more attractive than the technique the other side uses to solve the issue. For example, gun control supporter believe that removing guns or limiting them even more than now, they could stop tragic events from happening. However, gun supporters, also have a persuading arguement. they say that if more of the right people had guns, then if something like this were to ever happen again then people would be prepared and ready to take action. While these issues become more and more a problem, people are beginning to speak up on each sides.
Gun casualties and incidents throughout the country have woken the public up from its ignorance and shown them the danger guns can pose to society (Martinez, 2013). While some people want a complete blanket ban on the ownership of guns, others wants an easier access to guns so that every person may look after their own security. Part of what makes the term gun control a very controversial topic is that it’s used in a ambiguous way that does not explain the details of the issue and the demands, apart from literally controlling guns. The two prominent sides of the debate are the groups who ask for liberal gun laws that make it easier for a person to procure guns and conversely, there are groups who want to repeal the second amendment. 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.
The overall question that summarizes the topic may be seen as this – Is the right to bear arms more important than the safety of the general public? Gun rights advocates believe that under the constitution, they should have the right to possess and carry guns. As long as we keep the dangerous people in check, then the safety of the general public will not be a problem. However, gun control advocates are strong supporters of the idea that guns are responsible for the large-scale massacres. They believe that if we can eliminate guns from the big picture, we can eradicate the murders as well.
Multiple courses would be required to be taken before one purchases a gun, safes or cases with heavy locks should also be required to be purchased with the gun, the list of options can continue on for a long time. The argument that more guns leads to more gun accidents could easily be proven wrong with more gun safety
They hope that by raising awareness among doctors concerning these issues, they will be able to impact the way people think. And by doing so, change the gun regulation within the Second Amendment of the Constitution. In opposition to the numerous people who “feel that having a gun provides greater safety to them and their family,” Narang and his colleagues argue that in reality guns increase the risk of death and injuries as well as medical expenses. (Narang et al.) The authors’ beliefs that the possession of firearms increases the risk of death and injury have been evidently proven in several statistics acquired from the Kentucky Violent Death Reporting System.
People are now expecting these to happen and that is the problem. These types of things should not be expected. There are a lot of ways that are being talked about to better gun control in the United States, but some have their issues. President Trump is wanting to improve the federal background check system for guns purchased (Diaz,1). If this bill were to be passed it would hold the agencies accountable for uploading criminal history records.