Kenji Morizono Professor Martin Argumentative Essay 11/15/15 Gun Laws: Should they be stricter? The world should not spend anymore time following the fallacy that many people have. where they, instead of providing deterrents for people who want to commit a crime with a firearm. They put restrictions, on citizens who want a gun and leave them vulnerable to criminals who can, and most likely will, procure firearms from other sources. Whether they do this because of the despair of losing a loved one in a shooting. To the simple fear that the existence of guns in a country will cause an outbreak of murders. They all follow the fallacy that stricter gun laws will prevent more homicides involving the use of firearms. When the statistics show that, …show more content…
One way we could do this would be providing deterrents. The reason why we have punishments in place for breaking the law is to provide a deterrent for those who would want to break the law. Like if there was no punishment for, for example, stealing. There would be a higher amount of people that steal because there is no deterrents, no punishment. We need to make sure that the cons outweigh the pros. If there are more pros than cons, it is likely that more people will commit crimes than if the cons outweigh the pros. But the thing is, is that how heavy the pros and cons are for people differ. Again, with this example I will use, stealing. Someone who is rich, and has all the money one could ever need would be less likely to steal, than someone who is starving, and fears the pain of starvation and death, more than the punishment of fines. Or jail time, where they will, at the very least, have a roof over their head and healthier food rather than no food at all. Which is why for capital offenses, we have capital punishment, i.e. death. Because most people who commit crimes believe that the pros outweigh the cons, i.e they have something to gain. But if the punishment is death, where they lose everything they try to gain in the end, most people would see this con as heavy and maybe even heavier than the world itself. Though some …show more content…
Because “When there is a will, there is a way” unless we make sure no one can make a gun again, and destroy all existing guns, we cannot prevent criminals from getting access to firearms. In the end, unless stricter gun laws can prevent criminals from getting guns 100% of the time, it will really be pointless in the long
While many opponents argue the economics of the issue, they fail to acknowledge that the main goals of punishment are to correct behavior that is deviant from the law and to prevent similar incidences from occurring. Without capital punishment, the culprits would not have to confront the potential of death, meaning that the marginal cost of violent crime would be diminished. Therefore, capital punishment is an effective method to deter
If the death penalty came more into effect now a days, there would be a lot less killing, homicides, murders, etc. Go back to the old days; eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. If you steal, one finger gets cut off. If the government would stop being terrified of hurting someone’s feelings in this society and bring back those actions, crime percentages would fall
In order to do this it is necessary to get out of the “carceral” mindset that dominates our society. I think focusing on punishing people for committing crimes does more harm than good. Instead, I think it would be beneficial to focus on building societies where people don’t feel the need to harm others or steal. Our current (capitalist) system does nothing to disincentivize crime or prevent crimes from occurring. I propose that we give people access to the resources they need, whether that be socially, financially, health-wise, etc.
This will also give each member of a society a duty. Giving someone a duty makes them feel important and needed in society, which could lower the crime
There would be no reason in making a stricter access to guns for the public, criminals would not abide to the laws of ownership if they are going to commit a
Why take away the protection and recreational shooting practices of innocent citizens because others are irresponsible? Gun control laws are a major issue being discussed in the U.S. right now. Some believe that by condemning the availability of firearms to all, criminals and people with mental illnesses will be less likely to attain firearms. However they are then violating the people’s second amendment right, which give them the right to bear arms. According to the article on “Gun Control Laws” from the Issues and Controversies database, It all started on “June 12, 2016, when a gunman killed 49 at a gay nightclub in Orlando Florida.”
Should nonviolent crimes be rehabilitative versus punitive in nature? Over the past several decades state and federal incarceration rates have increased dramatically in the United States. As a consequence of more punitive laws and harsher sentencing policies, there are more people incarcerated in the nation’s prisons and jails than ever before. The U.S. leads the world in its rate of incarceration.
I understand that if everybody had a firearm it would raise the murder rate tremendously, but one must admit should be a little harder to get a gun, just cause you don’t have a criminal background does not mean you are not capable of doing the same actions a criminal. The gun control law should be made to where if you wanted to purchase a firearm, that you
Also, There should be more emphasis on rehabilitation than punishment because it would make people go to prison less often. With more open options for prison length decision, judges could have a more open mind towards how to determine the length of a
Strict regulations and limitations have been pursued already and clearly do not suffice. Statics brought to attention by gun control opponents, show that gun control laws have done little to reduce crime rates. Several restrictions have been made on certain guns, considered as overly dangerous, though in the hands of an unstable criminal even a legal hunting gun can be deadly. Countless restrictions have been made, however people have still found ways around them. If people are unstable and determined enough, they will find a gun, regardless of the restrictions or regulations.
So, criminals commit crimes like murder and rape, or even sexual assault and we treat them with resources instead of consequences. This will not reduce the biased aspect or crime. This will teach people that it’s okay to do these awful tasks because they are mentally impaired and tend to misguide themselves. This will not change a person to not be disgusted by a different ethnicity or different sex. Not giving people consequences for their actions will create a world full of irresponsible people.
In today’s society, one of the most alienating issues in American politics is gun control. More specifically, the issue is whether or not guns should be banned in the United States. Some people would say that guns should be banned because it would reduce crime as a whole and keep citizens safer. These people, enthusiasts of stricter gun laws, fear being safe in their country where there are so many people who have access to guns. Opponents of this argument, however, also fear losing safety.
The use of and the owning of guns is a very hot and debated topic in society today. For many, this is a life and death debate due to the recent and numerous school shootings. These school shootings have caused an outcry for more gun control, specifically in relation to the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting. Despite these calls, increased gun control is not the answer. Most gun owners’ use their guns responsibly and for good purposes.
Laws have been passed in places like Florida to deter criminals at committing crimes. Three Strikes law, if they are a habitual offender once they get three strikes they are subject to longer and tougher prison time. Still not enough to deter crime. The question that still remains my critics, and by many citizens is, what is the most effective way to prevent crime and issue
There is a worldwide trend in the use of penal imprisonment for serious offenses as capital punishment has been renounced by an increasing number of countries. Harsh punishments include capital punishment, life imprisonment and long-term incarceration. These forms of punishments are usually used against serious crimes that are seen as unethical, such as murder, assault and robbery. Many people believe that harsher punishments are more effective as they deter would-be criminals and ensure justice is served. Opposition towards harsh punishments have argued that harsher punishments does not necessarily increase effectiveness because they do not have a deterrent effect, do not decrease recidivism rates and do not provide rehabilitation.