Non Lethal Weapons Research Paper

A stronger focus on gun control in the United States involving restriction or even an outright ban of guns could serve to help the problem greatly. In 2015, 13,286 people were killed by firearms in the United States, with 26,819 suffering from non-lethal injuries (qtd. in “Guns in the US”). Taking away guns, the means that many urban criminals have to commit their crimes, would be very beneficial to cities. Recent studies found that the most effective way of reducing gun crime is to lower the amount of guns available in circulation. In the US specifically, studies show that the stricter gun laws are in a state, the lower the amount of deaths related to guns occur (Graham). While many believe that further restrictions on guns would not be feasible, both Australia and the United Kingdom managed to highly restrict or ban guns from their nations in order to reduce gun-related deaths and crime (Graham). Australia was able to rid the country of around 650,000 guns and their rate of robberies per 100,000 people sank from about 100 to 60 (cite later 1). This program of complete gun confiscation costed Australia $230 million. If a program of the same relative scale were to be done in the States, it would cost the government around $4 billion (Rieck). The alternative to a complete gun ban would be simply to restrict gun laws to make it much more difficult for a dangerous individual to purchase a gun. Background checks for all purchases of guns would become a requirement and

Chicago has had its ups and downs in the cities violent history, but early 2016 to present has been an exception. Chicago increased in homicides by 59 percent in 2016 and it has only become worse since then with a 29 percent increase in just the first few months of 2017 (Asher, FiveThirtyEight.com; Ford, The Atlantic). It is obvious that something needs to be done, but so far there have not been any major changes made or drastic measures taken in order to improve Chicago’s current state of being. Right now, the three most predominant causes are Chicago’s Police, Chicago’s many gangs, and firearms, hand guns in particular. If the city wants to make any improvements whatsoever then it needs act decisively on gangs and guns, start using different

People claim rifles cause more harm; However taking away rifles will not prevent someone from harming others. “People are killed in greater numbers by cars, bats, hammers, hands and feet. Examining the tool and attempting to ban the tool will have absolutely no effect.” (why gun groups 5). According to the FBI crime report of 2011, “Handguns were used in 6,220 of the 12,664 homicides reported. Rifles accounted for 323 homicides, with knives and other unnamed firearms making up most of the rest.” (why gun groups 7).

Guns. Guns are an enormously controversial topic discussed across the world; however, I am going to focus on guns in America specifically. America is in a deadly love affair with firearms despite 32,000 people each year. Losing their life to gun crime for every one person who died due to guns, two more are wounded which can drastically impact someone’s life. I feel that America has a huge influence in the world therefore if they get rid of their right to bare arms, others will soon follow.

In the past decade there have been many mass shootings which sparked a nationwide debate on the ban on assault weapons. Assault weapons are Semiautomatic weapons that are usually used in the military due to their advanced features. The difference between a Semiautomatic weapon and a regular pistol is that semiautomatic guns reload automatically and can fire consistently (Assault Weapons). Majority of Americans argue that Assault Weapons should be banned nationwide because of the amount of mass shootings caused by Assault weapons. The public does not need a military level weapon for protection. Also, other countries took legal action by banning assault weapons due to tragic events. While this debate has caused major controversies, the federal government has not taken any legal act, so states started to take on their own actions. States such as New York and Connecticut

They are trained to act quickly and efficiently in deadly situations. “Police sometimes do need to react quickly in potentially dangerous situations, such as when they reasonably believe the suspect might be armed” (DiLascio). While in the cases of both King and Rice, police acted quickly and violently. The officers in both cases waited to ask any questions, but many believe that is what they were supposed to do. Defuse the situation then ask questions later. Though officers do have actual guns, they have alternatives to the handgun as well. They have tasers and pepper spray that should always be on their person (Katel). “Police officers do have alternatives to their typical hand gun depending on the situation” (Katel). No matter the situation the officers have some sort of weapons depending on the severity of the situation. Many believe that officers only shoot their weapons if they feed complete danger for not only their lives, but the lives of surrounding citizens as

World War I. America needed an advantage to beat Germany and their allies. So a true patriot created one of the first assault weapon and named it the Thompson submachine gun. The weapon would of made a big difference on the war ,but it was created when the war was over. So gangsters acquired the weapons and killed many lives. New assault weapons came and ended more lives. Gangsters might be gone ,but criminals are still around and they use assault weapons for their preference of mass murdering. Assault weapons should be banned.

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. For violent crimes (assault, robbery and rape) guns were used 0.83% of the time in self-defense. In 20% of the self defense incidents, the guns were used by police

Concealed guns are allowing the public to overcome the dangers in the world, but they are also a danger in many ways. These dangers have lead to many horrific accidents in our present time. These incidents are also causing more people around the world to join in on these events. Concealed guns should be banned because by permitting handguns, it can end up causing more crimes, dangerous people are more likely to carry a gun and endanger the public, and guns can make the public paranoid.

Society as a whole has become less and less violent. Since 1991, reported crimes committed has dropped by almost double (Statista.com). Many people blame the AR-15 for most of the mass murders in America, and ask for the “assault” weapon to be banned. However, many details of the gun are skewed. In an article written by Margot Sanger-Katz of The New York Times, she stated that of all the gun deaths in America, 60% were suicides; and even more contrary to belief, nearly double of the mass killings (4 or more deaths) were with handguns instead of rifles (statista.com). Banning the AR-15 will not have an impact on violence whatsoever.

Ratified December 15, 1791, the Bill of Rights was created to ensure the safety of citizens rights across the United States. The Bill of Rights acted as a compromise between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, which would then lead to the authorization of the Bill of Rights. If it wasn’t for the Anti-Federalists demand for a Bill of Rights, it would’ve never been added to the Constitution, which would most likely lead to another abusive and corrupt central government.

It’s a cold winter morning, and a police officer is patrolling his normal route. Born and raised in this small Midwestern town, he is now starting his own family here. He rarely sees any excitement at 3 A.M., but he spots a car swerving as he passes it on a country highway. He turns around and pulls the car over to find that the driver is his neighbor. It is not a rare occurrence that it is someone he knows in such a small community. His neighbor appears to be intoxicated and becomes violent when the officer reaches for his handcuffs. He takes a swing at the officer and then attempts his escape. Thirty years prior, the officer would have had the option to draw his weapon and fire or risk a dangerous car chase. Thankfully, he has a Taser gun on his belt. He is able to draw, fire, and apprehend the subject with little effort and no loss of life. His neighbor may have died that night if it were not for this modern technology. It is for this and many other similar situations that law enforcement should be allowed to use Tasers.

Thorough studies examine that the distribution of less-lethal weapons have reduced issues such as assaults on specifically police officers, other studies examine that this is increasing the death and injuries of civilians rather than focusing primarily on the safety of officers employed for the police force. It is a growing problem in the United States with increasing health issues related to the cause of police use of force in incidents that occur regularly. It is important to consider whether these less-lethal weapons are associated with the like hood of injuries. The use of force can define a wide range of different variables of force; it is vital to assess the independent contribution of less-lethal weapons on the prevalence and incidence of injury to the suspects and officers involved. Less- lethal weapons have increased the odds of injury to suspects that may be life threatening, it is most likely essential for these officers to stick to less-lethal weapons which can be classified as OC sprays or CEDs. After carefully examining modules from states such as Orlando and Austin shows that injury had decreased after the distribution of less-lethal weapons. Other studies also state that these rates of injury were much lower rather than relying on physical injury and chemical

“Yes, people pull the trigger - but guns are the instrument of death. Gun control is necessary, and delay means more death and horror.” ("Eliot Spitzer." BrainyQuote.com. Xplore Inc, 2016. 28, September 2016.) The quote is explaining how guns can lead to many deaths, and the longer gun control is not enforced, as a result more deaths and tragedy there occur. Gun control has been a topic debated for years and still continuing, the same goes to protests. Many crimes are happening around the country, even if all of them are revolving around a different topic most of them have one thing in common, they all involve firearm.