Pros and Cons of Gun Ownership

Gun control is very controversial issue because all though guns can be used for leisure, they can cause much harm. In reason years, guns have landed in the wrong hands, and as a result many innocent lives were lost. The question we all ask is should more gun control laws be enacted? They say more gun control laws would reduce the deaths, with high compacity magazines should be banned because they turn people into mass murders. The second amendment of the US constitution protects the individual gun ownership.

On March 24th, 1998, firing from a wood overlooking the boy's school, 13-year-old Andrew golden and 11-year-old Mitchell Johnson shot and killed four middle school students and a teacher and injured ten other students in Jonesboro, Arkansas. Both boys had semiautomatic M-1 carbine with large ammunition magazine, two other riffles, seven handguns and more then 500 rounds of ammunition which they took from either one of the boy's home. I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it.? Clint Eastwood.

Gun controls history dates back in 1791, when the second amendment of the constitution was ratified. There are many stories about incidents involving guns appear frequently today in newspapers and on the news, radio. Dating back in 1968 there was a debate on passage of the gun control act, which banned ownership of guns by certain group of people and regulated the sale of guns. There was a supporters of restricting gun ownership argue the opposite, they felt that if more people were to have guns, there would be more violent crime incidents and more accidents involving guns, especially among children and teens. There are more deaths related to guns then there are with knifes, those people who want more restricting laws have a good reason to do so, to protect themselves and the people they love from harm. Both sides of this issue, people felt that their ideas were the ones that kept them from harm. The people's ideas different gun ownership versus no ownership this issue is still being debated today. With the limited gun control and restricted gun control, there has to be some medium that can be somewhat appease both sides. Everyone has a different opinion about the issue and what should be done to solve the problem, no matter what is done the main question is would restricting the ownership of firearms be a violation of our 2nd amendment? The people's rights are there in pace to protect our freedoms, so when is it permissible to infringe upon those rights for the protection of the common good?

According to Alboms Don't shoot holes in gun control?. He stated people committing these illegal acts are not just going to stop because guns are illegal. When looking into who would stop these people, another person with a gun is the answer. Some people support gun control just because they don't like guns. Back in spring of 206 on a show with Jon Stewart, entitled Bye Bye Birdie,? it tackled the gun controversy by satirizing former vice president Chinny accidental shooting of his friend during a sporting event. More laws can be constructed to ban individuals, or minors from buying a gun. There is already a strict background check that is required for all who wish to buy a gun and hold a foid card.

Todays guns rights advocate the 2nd amendment yet again the right to bear arms, when threatened by attempts to limit, but not eliminate, modern-day weapons. When you are out and about you hear people talk about the pros and cons of gun control and the debate about which still to this day haven't come to a conclusion. The gun crime statistics from all over reveals that after the laws have come into force, there has been a steep increase not only in the number of murders but also in the number of suicides. Let's talk about sandy hook elementary school massacre, they say gun violence follows suit. The conspiracy theories that comes with it that it was staged with crisis actors playing the part of the deceased, yet they kept popping up in every news about a gun massacre. They say it was an away for the government wanting to stop gun owners in having weapons to protect themselves. Gun control does not decrease gun ownership by criminals but instead reduces their incentives to refrain from violence. Because it decreases the supply of armed law-abiding citizens who might resist them.? (John McGinnis)

Firearms are classified into three board types handguns, rifles, and shotguns are both considered 'long guns. A semi-automatic weapon fires one bullet each time the user pules the trigger, it will also eject the empty shell after. Back in 2005 nine million background were conducted and for the first eleven months of 2013 the figure rode to nineteen million. Based on the gun manufactures there are over 300 million firearms owned by civilians and around 100 million of them are handguns. that's the gest of everything. Given the latest mass shooting incidence the 2nd amendment is being misinterpreted to mean what the farmers of the constitution never intended nor meant. The three branches of the government together with the states, sought a clear reinterpretation of well regulated. Stricter gun control laws would reduce deaths resulting from individually owned guns. Between 1999- 2013 the number of gun deaths totaled to 464,033. Out of that 270,237 was gun suicide cases, 9,983 were unintentional deaths, while 174,773 were homicides. With all the shootings it's not the only way guns are being used for the wrong purpose. With everything this can go either way people talking about taking away all guns from everyone pretty much disarming the good people. People are easier to control when they are disarmed, gun control is not about the gun, but is it about control. It considered as dangerous when citizens own guns.

The reason behind the debate is all about the mass shootings and that's where the pros and cons come in at. Those who believe new laws for gun control are not the answer argue the following:

These are the pros: The second amendment is not an unlimited right to own guns, more gun control laws would reduce gun deaths, more gun control laws are needed to protect women from domestic abusers and stalkers, guns are rarely used in self- defense, legally owned guns are frequently stolen and used by criminals, gun control laws would reduce the societal cost associated with gun violence, a majority of adults including gun owners, support common sense gun control such as background checks and bans on assault weapons, more gun control leads to fewer suicides, enacting gun control laws such as mandatory safety features would reduce the number of accidental gun deaths, I could go on with all the pros about gun control.

The Cons: gun control laws do not deter crime gun ownership deters crime, gun control laws infringe upon the right to self-defense and deny people a sense of safety, gun control laws especially those that try to ban assault weapons infringe up on the right to own guns for hunting and sports, gun control laws will not prevent criminals from obtaining guns or breaking laws, gun control laws give too much power to the government and may result in government tyranny and government taking away all guns from citizens, gun control laws such as background checks and micro-stamping are invasion of privacy, more gun control is unnecessary because relatively few people are killed by guns, gun control laws and lower gun ownership rates do not prevent suicides, more gun control is not needed education about gun safety is needed to prevent accidental gun death, gun control laws would prevent citizens from protecting themselves from foreign invaders.

The federal assault weapons ban, signed by former president Bill Clintons in 1994, expired and has not had enough support to be renewed. Which goes back to the semi-automatic gun designed in the ban, which haven't used in more than a small percentage of firearm related violent crime. This is a very complex topic where for decades gun control had been a secondary issue in presidential elections, but in the wake of an increasing number of mass public shootings, stricter gun control legislation is an attack on the 2nd amendment. There are gun rights where founding fathers saw the right to bear arms as a fundamental liberty of every law-abiding citizen.

Conclusion, the enactment and implementation of very strict gun control laws by the US is long overdue. People cannot continue butchering innocent citizens in the name of enjoying the provisions of the 2nd amendment. If it is the 2nd amendment that is creating all this loss of life and lawless, it should be thoroughly reinterested so that it works in the best interest of all Americans. It is very sad that gun owners perpetuate this phenomenon. This paper states a gest of what gun control is and the pros and cons. Talks about most crimes committed by criminals that think they will never get caught or that are suicidal after the shootings.

Reference:

LaFollette, Hugh. Gun Control.? Ethics, vol. 110, no. 2, 2000, pp. 263“281. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/233269.

Schuman, Howard, and Stanley Presser. The Gun Control Paradox.? Contexts, vol. 12, no. 2, 2013, pp. 68“69. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41960458.

Krouse, William J. "Preface to 'Can Gun Control Measures Reduce Gun Violence?'." Guns and Violence, edited by Debra A. Miller, Greenhaven Press, 2009. Current Controversies. Opposing Viewpoints in Context,

Did you like this example?

1401

58