Moreover, if the ownership of guns is limited, it will help prevent unnecessary deaths and violence caused by gun owners, especially students. Gun ownership should be totally controlled and regulated by the government because they will help in limiting the number of people who own guns. When gun
Likewise why should the government have to deal with these problems. The court system should not have to deal with these cases on gun violence they have more important problems to deal with. Court systems should not have to deal with unstable people who own and gun who have caused panic throughout their town or city. Stated in the article “10 Advantages and Disadvantages of Gun Control”, “ Funds could even be set aside so that licensing and safety classes are low-cost or free.”
“We have found that when large capacity magazines [and assault weapons] are regulated, you get drastic drops in both the incidence of gun massacres and the fatality rate of gun massacres.” (Klarevas, 2018) It is unrealistic to imagine all gun access to be nonexistent, the cease of access to any type of gun causes chaos in its own sense, and illegal weapons would be purchased, which would ensure even worse repercussions. A gun ban is not realistic, however gun control is. Critics argue limiting deadly assault weapons does not solve the nation’s gun issue.
Gun Control Lately people have been using guns in a negative way and causing a bad effect on the world. People have been using guns inapropriatly and have been performing mass killings. If guns are being used by people then the people using them should know how to use them correctly, or not being a crazy lunatic. When I was 12 I was playing with a pistol and accidentally shot it, I wasn’t hurt and no one else was hurt but somebody could have been injured badly. Gun laws are the cause to a lot of the violent crimes in the united states and laws need to be changed so people can’t purchase guns as easily that way we aren’t in as much trouble.
Despite the fact that acts of civil disobedience may be harmful when isolated or disorderly, they can produce significant, positive effects when occurring in an organized series. Civil disobedience can accomplish a goal, but only when conducted in a repeated, orderly manner. Otherwise, the consequences of acting solely or destructively would outweigh benefit; rebellious actions will not gain the government’s consideration if they cause severe disruption in the public. Antigone 's action of burying her brother was explicitly illegal, but she performed it anyway. When caught, she pleads to Creon, "I beg you: kill me" (Fitts and Fitzgerald 210).
Closing statement: The debate about gun control is inappropriate, because it does not go far enough. Only a completely ban of privately owned firearms can help drastically reduce the number of firearms related deaths and save countless lives. Without a doubt, the proposition of a complete ban of firearms will be met with fierce opposition. Critics will point at their eagerness to hunt, shoot for recreational purposes, and use guns for self-defense. However, recreational hunting and target practice are hardly basic rights that must be preserved at all costs.
More specifically, I believe that gun violence will always be an issue whether they are banned or not. If someone plans on hurting someone, they will not care about rules. For example, Guns are very easy for people to buy, but how is the seller going to know what they plan to do with it. It is not like they are going to say that they are going to kill someone with it.
Making these laws don’t just take away peoples weapons it takes away their sense of home, safety, and freedom. The people have always believed in protecting themselves and being able to live in peace. Without protection, nobody will be able to sleep in peace at night in their own country. Taking away guns to most people would just make things more badly instead of
Secondly,most people even if they can not get a gun they will easily just steal it. Banning guns will not do anything except make people steal more to get a gun which will just cause more problems. Also making stricter gun laws will also include police officers which will give them a disadvantage if they have no gun or have new rules while using the weapon.
The Death Penalty or the Capital Punishment should be considered illegal due to all of the things that are wrong with it. First of all the 8th amendment even says that there should be no cruel or unusual punishments for breaking the law, which the death penalty violates. Second the methods that they kill people sometimes don’t work and make the recipient die in pain and agony. Third of all 19 states already don’t allow it and some people are innocent that end up getting executed. So this shows why the death penalty should be abolished because the 8th amendment, the cruel methods used, and if we fixed this it would result in a safer and better society.
Guns themselves are not responsible for crime; it is the peoples who are guilty for it and using gun for killing peoples. Guns are the weapon which can be used for self-defense and protecting peoples but never hurting anyone. According to me government should restrict or normalize the use of guns by selling to people, because there are some good peoples who use gun for hunting, shooting practice and competition. As stated by Mytheos Holt, “Guns in the right hands help public safety. Guns in the wrong hands harm public safety”.
Lapierre implies, “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” This may be true, but what if neither party had a gun? I’m not saying that all guns in America should be banned, but instead no more of these assault rifles and firearms should be allowed in the average citizen 's hand. All guns sellers should have to provide a background research, psychological test, and a contract of intent on how the buyer will use the product. With these new selling strategies in place Adam Lanza would not have had the chance to commit this horrendous
In another view, many of those who are on the board of having guns have limited reasoning. Winkler even states “On the Other hand , gun advocates are too quick to assume that laws allowing guns on campus will discourage mass murderers.” Even in Arizona, which was an example in the article, it had passed a liberal carrying law, and with that, there was still a shooting of a man hurting a representative and killing six other people along with it. This remark goes back to the last paragraph and how it could make a setting bitter and uncomfortable instead of having people feel safer because they would be able to “fight back”. Also in a shooting that could happen at a school people could have a gun on them and still would not be able to protect himself, but also can shoot a bystander because they could have thought it was the shooter.
Gun control will make the people of the US weak because they will not be able to protect themselves when a dangerous man has gotten a gun illegally and wants to harm. “As columnist Thomas Sowell has noted: ‘The key fallacy of so called gun control laws is that such laws do not in fact control guns. They simply disarm law-abiding citizens, while people bent on violence find firearms readily available. Banning guns will not stop the crazed few who seek to open fire on the public’” (Hunter).
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