The laws that were passed play an important role in Gun control and they can help the crime rates with guns go down. Gun Control can do its job with interfering with law abiding gun owners as little as possible. Many people believe that Gun Control laws are not going to stop the rate of murders and deaths go down because they say that it is not the
While Prejean argues this, Van Den Haag counters with “the criminal volunteered to assume the risk of receiving a legal punishment” and “the punishment he suffers is the punishment he voluntarily risks” (Van Den Haag 3). But through
Grifin M. Price Kendra Gallos English III H 3/21/18 Gun Control Will Not Solve Anything Guns are given a bad reputation because of the terrors that can be committed by people who want to cause harm. Those who are gun control advocates wish to ban certain weapons without basis, ban certain weapon attachments, and restrict the rights of the second amendment. Gun control supporters base their opinion on statistics about gun violence that use a portion of data that is not about gun violence just to boost the value of the number.
Civilian firearms are for recreational activities such as hunting or shooting sports and self-defense (Cicconet, “Semi-automatic weapons unnecessary, unsafe in civilian hands”). The question on what to do about America’s gun control becomes the limelight of the stage every time national tragedy involving gun violence happens. According to Fred A. Roff Jr., president of the Colt Patent Fire Arms Co., he said, “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” (E8). This is irrelevant in many ways. Many gun advocates question how banning the use of guns for the civilians in U.S. would help protect the civilians when there are so many other forms of weapons that can replace guns (Adcock, “Harvard study reveals gun control counterproductive).
Death penalty would fit under general and specific deterrence. Those in favor believe that death penalty is the best way to protect society of the most dangerous criminals, “Imposing a severe punishment allows society to express moral outrage at the offender’s breach and simultaneously helps reinforce a shared sense of commitment to the violated norm.” (Acker, 2003, pg. 173). How
so if one wants to use a gun for a crime they will have wait and if they already have a criminal past they will not be able to get the firearm. For example, if one wants to buy a gun to commit suicide they will have to wait and maybe when they finally are able to get the firearm they do not want to commit such fatal incident. These laws will be stricter but it will be for the good of the people. Also, foreign invaders would not be able to commit a massacre. That want people with good intentions with guns not people with bad intentions.
Supporters also say that reasonable gun control and gun safety education can be more enforced, so large-scale weapon bans are not necessary. Law abiding citizens who own guns are able to protect themselves against government tyranny, if issues were ever to arise. Lastly, many supporters of guns state that an attempt to ban guns is a violation of our Second Amendment
Due to their hazardous nature, guns must always be kept in the hands of responsible users; therefore, people diagnosed with severe mental illnesses should not be allowed to possess or carry firearms. Our society has partially realized this notion, as indicated by the Gun Control Act passed by Congress in 1968, forbidding people who “had been involuntarily committed to a mental hospital” from purchasing guns (Webster 35). However, it must be stressed that the control implemented by this act is not enough, as mentally-disabled people are still misusing firearms and creating massacres across this
The Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States clearly states: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” Obama’s effort to enforce this amendment may leave America in a frantic position. Stricter gun laws would not benefit America because they would restrict the rights of citizens, restrict the reliability and freedom citizens deserve, and would do nothing to prevent killings from occurring. Recently, laws have been established within states that mistreat
Another concern about banning weapons from people with severe mental illness is that the policies cause the population to develop harmful ideas about individuals with severe mental illness (McGinty et al., 2013. Consequently, people with severe mental illness do not go into treatment (McGinty et al., 2013). Misconceptions about severe mental illness are not the only contributors to stigma; labels can also have a large effect on how the general population feels about those with severe mental
Studies done after the sandy hook shooting have found that, “ Contrary to pro-gun lobby claims, research into prevention of gun violence has shown that reasonable reforms could reduce the excessively high rates of firearm deaths in the US while preserving access firearms, possession is not illegal for people proposed do not infringe on law abiding citizens ',” (Vittes 6). This has two main point to it, the first and most clearly is that it is irrelevant on what one 's believes might be, reasonable gun control will save Americans lives. The more subtle meaning behind this study was that gun lobby 's push the agenda that their companies are protected by right. The gun manufacturing business is no small group of occupations. They receive money by having customers purchases firearms, which they donate to political parties to pass different legislation.
However, he said it is not a better deterrent than life jail. Jeffery Reiman also rejects the death penalty, and he has shown that it is not fair to punish killers less cruelty. Some people said that the death penalty prevents