Pros And Cons Of Stricter Gun Control Laws In The United States

The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun. If gun laws become opposed to the law, then only criminals will have guns. Stricter gun laws will not stop a madman from killing. In fact, 34% of mass shooters were prohibited from owning weapons; although, a surveyed showed 57% of gun owners believe guns are too easy to buy and 35% of people who carry guns would make Americans feel safer. Gun control will only affect the law-biding citizens simultaneously as the demand of illegal weapons on the black-market increases. Background checks will only restrict criminals from legally buying a firearm, but that does not stop a mentally ill person; which are usually the ones to start a shooting massacre. The second amendment literally states “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Protected by the second amendment, it will be hard to regulate guns because now every single individual has a right to bear arms. For example, the Texas Baptist church shooter was gun downed by an armed citizen. Had there been stricter gun laws in Texas towards not being able to have a concealed firearm in public, the shooter could have gotten away. People should have the right to exercise the second amendment; therefore, gun control will not work because criminals will always find a way to obtain guns, supply and demand on the black market will increase and there are more existing weapons than people in the U.S.

The debate over gun control has been raging through the American political systems for years. On one side, there is the National Rifle Association (NRA) and 2nd Amendment-citing citizens who use their firearms for hunting and self-defense. On the other, there is Handgun Control Inc. (HCI) and followers of the Brady Campaign who want to ban guns on the basis that they are dangerous. Both sides have strong arguments, anchored in historical precedent and statistical analysis. Anti-gun control lobbyists’ arguments include the guarantee of the 2nd Amendment, the definition of “militia” as any adult male, self-defense, the relative uselessness of permits and regulations, and court cases in favor of firearm possession. Pro-gun control activists

What gun control laws are going to help stop mass shootings? Even if the government banned the sale of assault rifles and guns in general,people with bad intentions are going to purchase them illegally. In the three recent mass shooting that caused many deaths, the shooters got their guns illegally with no trace of the sale on these weapons. Sandy Hook,Columbine,and San Bernardino were all mass shootings where the shooters got their guns illegally, stole the gun from family members or other people, and caused a lot of danger and harm to people. There would be no regulations to stop them because even if there were stricter gun laws, they still would be able to purchase their guns illegally.Stricter gun laws will not prevent crime,people will still get illegal firearms,and no sales to the public will reduce revenue.

The United States needs stricter federal handgun control laws because stricter gun control laws would reduce the number of handgun deaths and injuries, more gun control laws would lead to fewer suicides, banning high-capacity magazines would prevent mass shootings and murders, stricter gun control laws have worked in other countries by leading to lower homicide and suicide rates than the United States, and guns are rarely used in self-defense and they do not decrease crime rates.

Should gun control laws be changed? Well, first, gun control is entirely based off the notion that people are committing gun related crimes because they have access to them and these debates are whether or not the nation should ban guns entirely. This whole rebel of gun control change is said to help reduce violent crimes (Swickard). This is a well-known debate in today’s world. Many are involved in protests all around the world, while their schools are getting shot up and are asking for changes to make gun control laws stricter. However, the fact is, guns are not the problem in this world, it is the individual. If you put a gun in a criminal’s hand, they could do whatever they wish. Gun control laws should not be changed because current laws

Gun control laws should be strictly enforced because individuals can take advantage of the relaxed enforcement and harm others.

Following the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, lawmakers have begun reconsidering the gun laws that are currently in place. Many states have previously implemented “red flag laws” (Johnson 2). However, after the recent events, lawmakers are debating on whether or not those laws are enough. Of course, to most people, stronger gun control laws seems like an obvious decision, but it is not that easy. Gun control laws are complicated. It is a “balancing act in the United States between public safety and the right to bear arms” (Mueller 2). Lawmakers must carefully balance the safety and constitutional rights of citizens. This is difficult to do when everyone has different values and points of view.

“Guns don't kill people; people kill people.” With the United States having the highest gun ownership rate in the world, controversial conversation arises between two groups of people: pro-gun and pro-gun control. Gun control laws should be much more stern as it could decrease gun fatalities in public mass shootings, defeat gun purchasing loopholes, and promote general peacefulness, so that Americans will feel safer.

Have you ever wondered what it's like to have life and then in a blink of an eye it's gone? I have. I always wonder am I just going to die and see black or is there really life after death? People that lose their lives due to gun violence, their families have experienced this first hand.I am for stricter gun control laws.

“Guns are designed to kill. They have no other function” (Bowman and Newton). Today, there is a major debate whether or not guns should be legalized. Gun control is a firearm regulation which sets laws or policies that regulate the manufacture, sale, or possession of firearms. The Second Amendment was ratified in on December 15, 1791 that allowed people the right to bear arms, but many people disagree with that and to express their opinions, both sides protest. Guns have a long history in the United States. They were intentionally made for the advancement of military purposes. An example of what guns are used for currently would be for hunting or self-defense (“Gun Control”). Stricter gun control laws should be enacted like because they

Gun production is increasing drastically over the years (Horsley). Having this in mind, should there be a gun control law? People have different thoughts about it. Some may say that the guns are not the problem because they are not the ones who kill, but the person’s decision to shoot. Others believe that they are beneficially as for protection. The argument on having gun control is a controversy on protection, the background checks, and gun death statistics.

A DAY HAPPENS like any other day. Then some guy asks you for all of your card information. You refuse. He then pulls a Vector (a sub-machine gun, still fully automatic) and points it right at you. Luckily, the police pull up and take him away for illegal assault. Automatic guns and rifles are banned for civilian use, mostly because of how dangerous they are. This is the gun control law.

Gun control laws should not be strengthened in an attempt to keep the residents of the United States safe. For many people when the topic of gun control comes up they think about tragic shootings such as Sandy Hook or Columbine where innocent children lost their lives and blame it all on the gun used. This brings me to my first argument that guns are not the root cause of killings. Unfortunately even if all guns were abolished, anyone with an intent to kill will find a new option such as bombs, knives, or fire which has already been done in killings such as the Boston Marathon Bombing. The people doing the killing need fixing and help, not the laws. A study by Harvard showed several European countries with high gun ownership, like Norway, Finland, Germany and France had 9 times lower murder rates than in Luxembourg where handguns are totally banned and ownership of any kind of gun is minimal. This proves guns are not the issue, peoples mindsets are. This explains why Russia enforces very strict gun control on its people, but its murder rate still remains four times higher than in

Strict gun control is not the answer to America’s problem for the following reasons: First, Criminals can still acquire weapons in many illegal ways, strict gun laws violate the rights and liberties of American citizens, and gun control does not stop crime from happening. According to Laws, “The firearms being used in crimes are overwhelmingly illegal weapons, and unfortunately, the government is unable to track illegal weapons because of their illegal, unregistered status” (Gun.laws.com). First, many criminals can purchase it from a dealer that appears to be legal. PBS Frontline reported that “ The next biggest source of illegal gun transactions where criminals get guns are sales made by legally licensed but corrupt at-home and

What makes people think laws are going to stop all the madness? Mass shootings happen everywhere but nobody can stop them. Passing gun control laws are not going to stop the shootings. People break the law all the time and must of them never get caught. Within all the mass shootings that have gone on and with all the gun laws that are already out, adding more would not be a good idea because the people would not get the reaction that they want. People would just complain more about the laws and the outcome would steady be the same.