So gun control is not the answer to the problem. Law Enforcement needs to crack down on criminals and the illegal sales of firearms to help elevate the problems with the death or homicide rate. The normal everyday work class people do not need to be punished for the acts of criminals and drug dealers. If gun control were to take effect and guns were outlawed it would still not solve the problem at hand. It wouldn’t solve the problems because only the outlaws
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.
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
Guns are used for protecting the citizens by police officers and the military, as well as, for many personal reasons like hunting, and self-defense. There are times that guns are used for the wrong reasons like murder, or put in the wrong hands which lead to accidental deaths. Choosing a stand on gun control can be hard, but hearing both sides can help a person make a decision. Two strong organizations in the U.S. have opposing views on gun control; each of which have great politicians. The National Rifle Association (NRA) is against gun control, as The Brady Center is fighting for gun control.
Eliminating the second Amendment will make it harder for law-abiding citizens to protect themselves against psychos with guns. The first reason why citizens should be allowed to have guns for self defense on the street and in their homes is the fact that police are not required to protect every individual. The former Florida Attorney General Jim Smith told Florida legislators that police responded to only 28.57% of calls for help to Dade County authorities. He was asked why so many citizens in Dade County were buying guns and he responded, “they d*** well better, they’ve got to protect themselves.” The Department of Justice discovered that in 1989 there were 168,881 crimes of violence which were not responded to by police within one hour. On average it takes 15-30 minutes for police officers to get to a crime scene.
Gun control ENG/102 8/11/10 Brian Kevin Gun control 1 Introduction: Gun control advocates have cried foul, because of the Supreme Court 2010 ruling they believe will damage the chances gun control laws to reduce crime. While many people consider gun control to be too restrictive, advocates are of the mind that we should remove all the guns, at all cost. The Supreme Court ruling has mandated that state and city governments have no choice but to respect the Second Amendment of their citizens. While the ruling does not completely abolish current gun restrictions, it does weaken the ability of the local government to
The allowance of guns to be concealed by students and professors on public campuses can cloud the campus officers’ duties during these chaotic times, potentially cause mislead shots. Every college campus employees certified and trained security to protect their campus. For instance, if a largely debated rally was to be held in an open college court yard, then campus security would have previously notified, but while this controversial meeting is being held, passionate advocates get too passionate and an altercation occurs. With many students and possibly outside students in an open area, shots can be fired by non certified parties. The act of fired shots in a mix of chaos leads to confusion for the on staff security.
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).
Fights in schools happen all the time, but usually the worst of it is a couple punches thrown. What would happen if those students had guns because they were allowed to? I just don’t see the thinking in why people would allow something like that to happen. I understand why people would want to protect themselves on campus because of those school shootings but wouldn’t the better idea be to prevent another one from happening such as making stricter laws on