Continuing to allow our citizens to own and operate firearms is not just basic freedom, it is safety. Facts involving the distribution of guns prove that making guns harder to buy through retail will not solve any problems. By examining what has taken place in Australia, it is clear that if guns are taken away from the citizens, it will not help lower crimes committed or deaths related to guns. In order to prevent crime, including homicides and mass shootings, gun control laws shouldn't infringe upon citizens constitutional rights to safety and self defense. It is assumed that if stricter gun laws that restricted people from buying guns by adding additional requirements when purchasing like deeper background checks took place, less crimes would be committed. However, a large majority of criminals don't buy their guns from licensed dealers. Criminals have proven to buy or take their guns from illegal markets, family …show more content…
In Australia, guns were taken by the government in what they referred to as a buy back set up but it was mandatory. Immediately after this, the country’s rape, assault, and other crimes increased dramatically but steadily lowered after the course of several years. Gun control has actually had no significant impact on Australia’s murder rates. They have remained steady, proving that increased gun control has no affect on overall murder rates. Because it is clear that “gun control has no significant impact on murder rates” we can be sure that increased gun control has very little to no benefits (King). Similar results were seen in the United Kingdom after all handguns were banned. Homicides rates have been higher than before the ban in 1997 in all but one year. Specifically, handgun homicides have nearly doubled as a result of the