Thus, guns are using for self-defense, the advantages of gun using greatly outweigh the disadvantages. Since people are able to protect themselves by using guns when they are in danger, the government should encourage people to own guns instead of prohibiting them. Guns are not the key factor that cause numerous violent incidents, they do not kill people, but people do. The main reason of causing those incidents is people’s morals and values.
Citizens need to stand up and not take the blame for other individuals who choose to inflict harm. Law-abiding citizens should not be penalized for the actions of a few deranged people. It is true some weapons do not belong in the hands of untrained people, and the National Rifle Association has been instrumental in pushing for responsibility and safety on the part of gun owners without imposing too much on the Second Amendment right (Kopel). Critics such as David DeGrazia of George Washington University argue that private ownership of handguns leads to more social harms than it prevents (Hsiao and Bernstein). David DeGrazia proposes a moderate control of guns meaning that only individuals with a need for self-protection be allowed to own a gun and only after a complete course in safety (Hsiao and Berstein).
This is not the only side of the argument, though, there are opposers to enforcing gun laws that believe that there are already enough laws for buying guns and what you can do with them. The opposers also believe that we should focus more of our efforts on the mental health of the people instead of the guns they use. The debate on gun control is a very pressing matter. Some believe that the laws on gun control should be stricter, while others believe the laws should be looser for self-defense and hunting. Of course, homicides and accessibility of guns are not the only topics the public focuses on.
According to “Gun Control,” these “High-Risk” folk are purchasing firearms because of the flawed system (“Gun Control”). People opposed to gun control argue that taking guns from the citizens does not prevent criminals from getting their hands on guns, as they will just get them illegally anyways. People who oppose gun licensing, mandatory waiting periods and background checks argue that the “normal” gun owners must and do these things, not the criminals. They also argue that criminals are less likely to commit crimes if they think their victims may be armed. Notably, another viable source of information is Bitto, Dana, and Elisa Juliano’s report on the Aurora, Colorado movie theater shooting in 2012.
Gun violence occurs because there is a lack of respect for the value of human life. Arguments devolve into violence because of an emotional reaction. Gangs use gun violence as a way to establish territorial control because they feel like their lives aren’t being valued. Some might say gun violence is a heart problem, but it is a value problem. The US Constitution speaks of equality for all.
Gun control is what restricts people from buying and using guns, but these laws are not strengthened at the extent they need to be strengthened. This leads to many people getting these guns and using them to cause mass shootings all over the U.S. For example, according to the Council on Foreign Relationship, a news article that covers major world issues, in 2017, mass shootings at a music festival in Las Vegas and at a church near San Antonio have rekindled the gun control debate (“U.S. Gun Policy: Global Comparisons”). The fact that gun control is still not tightened is a huge margin and error, and still causes mass shootings as we just covered. Many people have said that we should not allow guns to be purchased, which would seem like the logical option. However, according to the same source, Council on Foreign Relationship, some states, such as Idaho, Alaska, and Kansas, have passed various laws attempting to nullify
This way of thinking is understandable because if we don't get weapons, then how are we supposed to protect ourselves. I also disagree with this because if the laws are more strict then there will be less crime and this will make them not want to do the right thing. Some argue that making gun control laws more strict is not the best way to go. ( Sheldon Richman) argues that gun control is ineffective at preventing crime.
Patrice Tseh Professor Worke E102 03/21/2018 Synthesis Essay Gun Control in The United States Guns. Instruments once used specifically, in war environments are now flooding the streets and putting the people in danger. It usually was safe for people to go out to enjoy entertaining events such as concerts.
The problem we have is the people who have the guns. “Gun control laws are just as old or older than the second amendment, the gun control wasn’t as strict as they are now. There still were laws, people were imprisoned if they were doing something illegal with firearms.” (Should more gun control laws be enacted) Mentally ill people are not allowed to own or purchase firearms.
Do you know how many people are in danger because of a gun. Many lives have been taken just because of a single bullet, despite this little to no action has taken place about these weapons, it’s a little frightening isn’t it. Shootings and deaths by guns are becoming all too common and many people have argued whether or not our government need to do something about this. If gun laws and gun control were implemented then it would lower violence, make it harder for criminals to get these items, and save lives. Though gun control may not protect every life, it would save many.