How gun laws affect crime rate: Do gun laws directly affect crime? The date is October 16, 2013. Allegheny County Police issued a search warrant for Asia M. Harris’s house. The officers searched the house and found a Springfield XDM-40 .40 caliber pistol in the master bedroom that she shared with a convicted felon Mark A. Brazil. Later in court Harris said that Brazil gave her $800 to buy Springfield XDM-40. (Pittsburgh) Just remember current laws that try to prevent this issue. This case just shows people will find a way around the law no matter what the cost or situation. In 1789 the second amendment got signed. The second amendment states the following a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right …show more content…
In 1994 the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act came into effect. A sharp spike in the crime rate happened once the act came into effect. In 2004 the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act expired and then there was a sharp drop in the crime rate(Alexia). Once again in 2007 another act passed that banned a broad range of firearms (Magoon pg 92). This directly relates to the small spike of crime rate in 2007. In the statistic to the right there a four noticeably large spikes in the years of 1975, 1980, 1993, and 1994 (Alexia pg 2). In all four years gun laws appear in relation. In 1993 Congress passed the The Brady Handgun Violence Act. The main action that the Brady handgun act did, it put a five day waiting period on selling firearms(Bureau). In 1994 the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act becomes law(Alexia pg 2). The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act banned many types of firearms and cosmetic firearm attachments. These two examples show a noticeable …show more content…
Next, in 2008 the NICS improvement act got passed. Later in 2008 the D.C. handgun ban got rejected. Murder rates declined 4.4 percent, but in larger cities 3 percent increase happened. People will always find a way around a restriction. Guns will never get abolished contradictory to what some may think, but the laws that the government places on guns clearly and limit what a person can and can’t have affect crime rate in negative ways. The government must govern, lead, and protect the people of the United States not limit us in ways that overall hurt the population. The government needs to reevaluate the laws that protect our country to the end. Even if they try to ban certain criteria of guns people will always find a way around the
The second amendment and the input of gun control laws has been a big issue, especially when the number of mass murders and shootings are continuing to grow in the United States. Putting a limit or constraint on people who own guns will not stop the problem. Putting a limit may hold someone back for a short period of time, but somehow will still find one, purchase it, and use it. Some people just own a gun for the simple purpose of protection. Three major components of the second amendment will be affected if some type of gun control were to take place and those three components are concealed carry, weapons of mass destruction, and invasion of privacy.
With the 2nd Amendment being in place, there have been thousands of mass shootings involving gun violence. Starting with one of the earliest documented cases, in 1984 James Oliver Huberty, a 41 year
Some days crime rates are up and then the next they are down, what we do know is that America is becoming safer. In 2005, 11,346 persons were killed by firearm violence 477,040 persons were victims of a crime committed with a firearm, (National Institute of Justice). Surprisingly, a lot of gun violence in America is related to self defense. Between 1987 and 1990 it was found that guns were used in defense during a crime incident 64,615 times annually. This equates to two times out of 1,000 incidents (0.2%) that occurred in this time frame.
Gun laws raise the rates of many different types of crimes in America. “Between 1980 and 2009, states with more restrictive concealed weapon laws had 10% higher crime rates” (Lott, Jr.). The occurrence of higher crime in states with stricter gun laws shows that restrictions against firearms actually have a negative effect on crime. Criminal actions like auto theft in cities have become more frequent as stricter gun regulations take place (Mustard). These crimes are the cause of new laws that prevent the carry of concealed weapons since there is nothing that people have to defend themselves with.
Introduction Looking at the nightly news, many would believe violent crimes are at an all-time high. There are not just one on one violent crimes or gang violent crimes. There is court shootings, school shootings, church shootings, theater shootings, mall shootings, workplace shootings, and others. Where most one on one crime is committed with illegal guns, mass shootings are done with handguns purchased legally.
Is Gun control the answer? These type of questions are being asked by lawmakers. Researchers are saying that taking away all guns is not the answer and are looking for other ways to prevent mass shootings. In the U.K almost all handguns were banned from civilian possession in 1977. Morris M. says “The rate for intentional homicide in the UK in 1996—the year of the Dunblane Massacre—was 1.12 per 100,000.
‘’Guns are responsible for over thirty-three thousand deaths in the United States annually, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).. In 2014, the CDC reported that 11,008 of the 15,872 homicides committed in the United States that year involved a firearm. Of the 42,826 suicides reported that year, 21,386 involved a firearm. These statistics have inspired efforts at the federal and state levels to enact gun control legislation to reduce crime and violence’’(‘’Gun Control’’). According to the statistic guns are held for over 33,000 deaths in the United States.
In fact, this issue is broad and has different faces depending on which angle you look at it. This paper will analyze the different faces of the issue, those who are mostly affected by gun violence, the areas with the most numbers of gun related violence as well as the periods that were mostly
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.
During the assault weapons ban of 1994, gun deaths were significantly low, as shown in a graph in the Washington Post. This shows that another ban on assault weapons, and possibly a permanent one, could largely impact the force leading to gun violence and
In the past, the major gun control legislations that have been put into effect have not stopped people from obtaining firearms (Gun Control.) There have also been cases in the past where cities have attempted to ban handguns. After the ban was put into effect, murder rates tended to rise instead of drop, unlike what most people might assume. Crime rates and violence also skyrocketed after the bans were put into effect. Another problem with taking guns away, or banning them, is that the government cannot expect everyone to abide by the laws.
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.
This paper also provides an interesting solution to gun violence; instead of already proven ineffective gun control laws, these authors suggest looking at why these laws are ineffective. Planty, Michael, and Jennifer
In fact, according to the General Social Survey 1972-2006 data, “approximately 41.6% of U.S. households report that guns are present.” To add onto this, in 1994 alone, there were 38,505 gun-related deaths, with 70% of total homicides also being related to firearms. From 1985 to 1992, the number of firearms produced rose by 92%, and with it rose the number of deaths. The number of firearm-related deaths grew up 48% between 1985 and 1992, from 8,902 to 13,220 deaths. It is clear that the number of gun-related deaths rose greatly from 1985 to 1992, and then to
As the regulation on the use of the firearms was being changed from time to time, the effects were also changing in the same trend. Guns in the hands of civilians are majorly for personal protection. It is estimated that at least 162,000 civilians use guns per year for self defense, in which if not for the gun, they would have been killed. By adopting the policies that help control the guns in the hands of individuals, murders, aggravated assaults and rape cases have greatly reduced. It is therefore evident that criminals respond rationally to deterrence threats.