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. Therefore, I conclude that banning guns is not worth it because people who want to use them for negative reasons will even if they are banned.
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.
Regarding the statement that whether citizens in United States should own guns, some people would say that arming themselves can prevent tragedy from occurring, while others assume that owning guns has been caused some problems and risks of violent events yearly.I tend to agree that guns for citizens should be reasonably banned in United States because of to reduce deaths from shootings and feasible solutions of gun-banning life. Guns in America has been already caused a large number of problems such as shooting and killing events. Guns are sometimes not considered as defending tools. Instead, they become dangerous toys and even for entertainment because some of youth consider that holding a real gun like characters in movies excites them. Some of them do not have the consciousness that guns can be factually used to kill livings.
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. Therefore if the government were blaming the people using the guns more than the guns,there would be less school shootings since most of them have depression or a disability of some sort. If those people could get help before they take action then maybe the actions they are thinking about doing would not
Gun violence occurs based on the unstable people in control of the gun not the gun itself. 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.” This shows the court could waste a lot of money funding gun classes when they could be funding something more important like schools or homes for homeless people.Along with this fact why should mentally unstable citizens own a gun in the first place.
Guns control is not strict enough these days. The U.S government does not put down laws strict enough to deal with people purchasing guns without having a license. Some people who are aggressive and have health issues should not be allowed to have guns because they might go out and shoot people in anger. "No legitimate study in the U.S has ever shown that gun control has any positive Impact on crime"? Therefore, the law needs to improve.
Positive Impact of Guns In America Americans have the privilege and the right to purchase and own personal firearms for the means of self defense. Some citizens, however, exploit this right for the sole purpose of harming those around them. Mass shootings are some of the most common and terrifying events that can happen to someone in America today. Despite all the harm that guns cause, they should not be banned because they also have many positive effects for the American people that we would not want to lose. One reason to keep guns in the hands of the people is fairly simple, but its impact is highly underestimated: guns stop criminals and in some cases prevent the crime before it even begins.
The people who want to go out and hurt someone obviously have it in their head to start off with, so they will find a way to get a gun or hurt someone in a different way, taking away gun rights isn’t going to stop people from killing if that’s what their initial intentions are in the first place. Adding to it, many Americans believe that that taking away gun rights is unconstitutional. “This is a freedom that Americans have acquired over time, but by banning guns it takes that freedom away, and thus going against the declaration of independence because it is a law that is restricting the people from their rights to own a weapon for protection.” (Debate). The biggest upset about the taking away guns from our people is the fact that it goes against everything America has always bragged out being, the land of the free. Making these laws don’t just take away peoples weapons it takes away their sense of home, safety, and freedom.
Brad Pitt has said in the past "I feel better having a gun. I don't feel the house is completely safe, if I don't have one hidden somewhere." Also, Washington DC attorney general Karl A Racine said that, “We believe that the District’s gun laws are reasonable and necessary to ensure public safety in a dense urban area.” The actual problem is not the gun, it’s the person. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. This is a very common statement used by many people.
The United States of America is known to be a free country, but would it be defined as being free if permission is granted for citizens to have access to a gun(s) with them wherever they go? In my perspective, I strongly disagree with the fact of that specific reason which makes America an unfree country. This is hazardous because by carrying a gun around with you will often have the reasons like safety but it could also make you a terrorist like other people who want to use it to plot murder occasionally for money or revenge. Some people would agree and disagree with this idea because of many reasons. I personally think that banning guns is a better idea than keeping them for all citizens.
Even though gun laws prevent deaths, they infringe so many rights in the immutable Bill of Rights, which is one of the foundations of the great United States. Gun laws give too much power to the government and way less from the people, which will lead to government corruption. And, stated by ClearPictureOnline.com,”Guns don 't kill people, people do. We need to concentrate on the values and morals of our citizens and at the role the media plays in glorifying violence and the lack of respect for law.” (Shootout: Do We Need More Gun Control Regulations?) What people don 't understand is that they are taking away their own freedoms with Gun Control.
Another strategy of keeping dangerous guns from murdering truthful people is to boycott a whole kind of weapon. The AK-47 is a common illustration of that. Once more, the criminals still have restricted access to the weapon through underground markets, yet these banned weapons are powerful to the point that there is truly no reason for them in the homes or used for hunting. This can without much of a stretch be adverted by the regular criminal who knows anything about the way firearms are collected. A semi-automatic assault rifle can be changed over into a completely automatic firearm with a just a little modifications.
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
People also “...support the rights of hunters, sport shooters, and recreational gunmen.” (openreader.org).Criminals are already breaking the law, so adding more won 't deter them. “Criminals will get hold of guns – indeed, by definition, if guns are outlawed, one becomes a criminal just by acquiring one – and leave non-criminals more vulnerable than ever.” (bigthink.com). Gun control laws do not help deter, and only slightly inconvenience them. Guns are a high trade item in the US, so there are definitely many other illegal sources. Also making strict gun laws takes power from the people.
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”.