The Pros And Cons Of Gun Control

For many years, people have been pushing the American government to implement new laws that deal with gun control. Supporters of the argument claim that increased gun control will drastically reduce the crime rate in America. Nevertheless, a majority of gun control arguments are formed from strict control of data and emotional appeal. The mainstream media picks up these stories and broadcasts them to viewers without providing any context to them. While gun control activists assert that gun control is necessary, the American government should not ban guns because of the following reasons: potential vulnerability of innocent people being shot at by criminals and the inability for people to defend themselves against their own government.

As firearm ownership and firearm manufacturing have been increasing over the past twenty years, gun murders have been decreasing (“Gun Rhetoric” 2). Although, many mass shootings have taken place over the past twenty years and have inflamed the gun control debate. The major problem with enacting more gun control laws is most mass shootings have happened with illegally obtained guns.

In the words of Dr. Suzanna Gratia Hupp ¨ A politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual… as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of¨. Both the pro gun and anti gun movements raise some persuasive and plausible points about their sides. The anti gun movement has a history of an oppressive, racist and totalitarian way of trying to control people's right to bear arms which in no way prevented gun violence. The gun control movement as a whole doesn't care about protecting citizens but it instead wants to give the federal government more control over its citizens.

One of the most debated and polarizing issues in modern day America is the issues surrounding the second amendment. The issue of gun control has been raging on in the American political scene for years and, talk about the issue has only grown. The debate has always been brought to the limelight after major shootings throughout the United States, most recently with the horrible attack at the nightclub in Orlando, Florida. According to the crowd sourced website, Mass Shooting Tracker, there have over 370 mass shootings that have taken place this year itself. The tracker considers all acts of violence where four or more people are wounded or killed. The second amendment has been put into place over 200 years ago to give the people the right to bear arms. While people argue the exact interpretation of the second amendment, the ability to own a gun in America must be respected. There are many pros and cons to owning guns in America, but we can all agree that drastic steps must be taken to end the violence that guns have strangled America with.

Some say that more gun control laws would reduce gun deaths. The website, procon.org, Should More Gun Control Laws Be Enacted, February 26, 2016, says, “There were 464,033 total gun deaths between 1999 and 2013” (p 6). Of these deaths, 58.2% were suicide, 37.7% were homicides, and 2.2% were unintentional. Guns are the leading cause of death by homicide with 66.6% and by suicide with 52.2%, and are the 12th leading cause of all deaths. The study published by American Journal of Public Health found that "legal purchase of a handgun appears to be associated with a long-lasting increased risk of violent death" (p 6). Guns are related to a lot of deaths, and are among the top weapons associated with all deaths. Also, just legally owning one increases a person’s risk of dying

America needs to institute, and initiate gun control laws throughout the entire nation. But not everybody who inhabits the United States believes in regulating arms. Those who are against establishing gun laws argue that gun control directly infringes upon their “right to bear arms” granted to them by the 2nd Amendment. Anti gun control supporters, such as the National Rifle Association, often claim that the act of regulating guns is a sufficient reason why such an Amendment was introduced in the constitution; to protect themselves from any and all forms of violation of civil liberties and freedom. Supporters of anti gun laws are unwilling to welcome any interpretations of the 2nd Amendment that do not match up “word for word,” as was written in the Bill of Rights.

It is our constitutional right to bear arms to protect ourselves from an overbearing government, also to protect our life, liberty, and property. Politicians have sworn to protect and uphold our constitution yet they aim to bring down the second amendment. Guns have been used in wars since the 13 century, and were also a vital part of America becoming freed from the hold of the monarchy. Guns were used as tools for survival during the founding of our great country, as well as protecting weaker countries from

The right to bear arms has gone way back to when Indians ruled the land. People with guns have fought and won our freedom from many different countries. Since we have had guns for so long in America, it has become a tradition to get or own a gun. It would make people go insane if the people got their right to bear arms taken away from the government (Alters2 1 of 8 ). Since the beginning of fire arms it has become a tradition for most families in America. Firearm ownership has been an America tradition and it has been in America since the early 1600s when England sent people to North America. In England it was a right to use guns and they encouraged people to use them. Firearms have made America what it is today, and getting independence

The right to bear arms is guaranteed in the constitution by the Second Amendment. Liberals are looking to amend the constitution any way they can. They want to ban handguns or at least restrict sales. Studies have shown that gun control cannot stop people from committing the crime.

Indeed Congress around then did not even feel it important to put an Amendment in the Constitution on the grounds that having a gun was as basic as having underpants. Having a gun around then was common to the point that it was not even consider needing to legitimize it. “Right had not been questioned, for it was viewed as a traditional privilege lying outside the Constitution…” (Hook, 30). Today, is an alternate story. With more regulations on guns being passed, the Second Amendment is the main thing gatherings like the NRA need to clutch. Both sides need to take a seat and discover an answer for this firearm control face off regarding. Then again one day this Amendment will be translated and guns in subject’s hands will be a relic of days gone by, unless obviously it is in a state supported local

Some Americans feel that because guns are already regulated in so many other countries, America should just follow suit, while others believe guns both represent and help guarantee our independence, our liberty, and our freedom to make our own decisions. The founding fathers anticipated that gun control could become a serious issue in the future, so they added the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The Second Amendment states: “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.“ Most gun control activists focus in isolation on the beginning of the amendment where the founders wrote that a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state. They then try to argue that only the military or the National Guard should have access to guns, not individuals. In so arguing, however, they completely ignore the last part of the Second Amendment, which provides that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The founders obviously envisioned that the people would keep and use firearms to protect themselves and their country. Unfortunately many politicians don’t see it that way. Yet, the Supreme Court has struck down firearm bans again and again. The 2008 Supreme Court case, District of Columbia vs. Heller,

In the end, all gun control accomplish is keeping guns out of the hands of those who buy them legally, which includes almost no criminals. Since they don’t follow the law anyway, more laws only hinder law abiding people whose only wish is to defend themselves. Background checks are too easy for most criminals to pass, proving that not even the law can stop them. This causes the innocent people to be defenseless and the criminals to rule. Not only do gun control advocates wish to revoke the people’s rights to the second amendment, they also wish to leave citizens at the mercy of their enemies. No substantial reason for gun control exists. It fails to control criminals and crime, while taking guns from law-abiding Americans.. Even if laws did

By the dawn of the Modern American Civil Rights Movement, gone were the egregious Black Codes and numerous African-Americans own guns to protect themselves from harm, especially in the South where the legal system failed to alleviate their plight.

“A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” The right of all Americans to bear arms is a right the Founding Fathers held to equal importance as the Constitution itself. Gun control laws directly violate this right and therefore should not even be under consideration. Even if that issue is overlooked, gun control advocates state that in order to reduce firearm related violence, gun control laws must be implemented to remove the violence caused by firearms. Although this may seem reasonable, the consequences of such laws are ironically counterproductive; they exacerbate the problem instead of fixing it. Besides the fact that the American

Gun control is one of the most talked about topics in modern day America. 43 of 50 states have the right to bear arms. Most states have to background check you in order for you to purchase or sell guns. Some other states prevent carrying guns and some other ban assault rifle weapons. People who support the gun laws say that the second amendment was meant for militias and that gun restrictions have always existed. People who oppose that say that guns are needed for self-defense from people who invade houses or are actual threats. Although both of those are correct, there will always be two sides for control laws.