Do Gun Control Laws Make A Difference?

Not only does the Second Amendment provide citizens with peace of mind that they can protect themselves against the authority, but it also allows citizens to protect themselves from fellow Americans, should the need arise. Firearms help to create a level playing field for all people, regardless of their age, size, gender, or even disability. Because we have the ability to carry arms, dangerous people no longer have the ability to pick and choose “easy” victims due to their lesser size or strength. No matter who you are, an added measure of security can make all the difference in a dangerous

Many people also fear that gun control will give too much power to the government. This is one of the main reasons for the second amendment. Wayne LaPierre from the NRA stated “If you look at why our founding fathers put the second amendment there, they had lived under the tyranny of King George and they wanted to make sure that these free people in this new country would never be subjugated again and have to live under tyranny.” This means the reason for the second amendment is so that we, the people of the United States of America would never have to fear the government having too much power as they did back before 1776 (Pro-Con).

The role guns play in our society has long been debated on whether or not citizens have the right to own guns. There are those who believe that guns have no role in the hands of private citizens. Whereas there are those who believe that guns are the very foundation that protects our rights and liberties expressed in the Constitution. The debate is over whether or not there should be stricter laws preventing people to own guns. Though gun control and gun rights advocates share similar views on background checks and requirements, each have different views on the safety of guns and the Second Amendment meaning.

Gun control is a very touchy topic in the US. mass shootings have made this subject harder to talk about, but Americas strong belief in the 2nd amendment make it impossible to completely take away our guns. The most recent mass shooting in Aurora, Colorado has sparked more interest in this topic from both activist and anti-gun advocates. Our culture has always heavily relied on guns for things like hunting, target shooting, and mainly personal protection. Would taking away our guns and to make a safer really work. This is the question will attempt to answer and my short persuasive essay.

More gun laws would have a negative effect on shootings and crime rates. Stricter gun laws would not prevent people from getting guns, would not prevent killings, and would not fare well with the people of the United States. Strict gun laws would only prevent law-abiding citizens from getting guns, and criminals would still be able to get them. Crime and shooting rates do not go down after increase in gun-restrictive laws are passed. People in the United States have the right to defend themselves from harm, and the 2nd Amendment right to own firearms.

The second amendment gives people the right to own a firearm. The founding fathers might have thought a gun was the best form of protection but many years have past since then and humans have evolved. Times are different and society is different. Technology has a big impact on people and how we think and all those variables can affect people with how they react in stressful situations. We have to consider the mental stability of those in possession of the weapons, it is important to keep the weapon away from loved ones or other people, and is the law protecting those in possession of the weapons or putting lives in more danger.

Every day some news related to gun violence are being heard all over the world. Shooting in driveway, public places, schools, homicide and suicide are some of different types of gun violence. Shooting on people and killing them is a big issue in the world and different comments are provided about that. One of the most important of them is about gun control laws. Stingl (2013) says “The term gun control as it is used in the United States refers to any action taken by the federal government or by state or local governments to regulate, through legislation, the sale, purchase, safety, and use of handguns and other types of firearms by individual citizens.” According to this idea gun control laws should be

Loopholes in the gun control laws are allowing prohibited people to access of firearms easily. As the country with the largest stockpile of privately owned firearms, we aren’t doing much to prevent them from falling on the wrong hands. According to The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act convicted

With the crime rate commonly believed to be detrimental to the safety of society, one might assume to inflict stricter gun control laws. But, just how effective are these laws in reducing the amount of crime committed? As examined by Kleck and Patterson (2006), the rationale for gun control must first include the assumption that the availability of guns entails a significantly positive correlation on violence rates. But, Kates and Mauser (2006) studied the aggregate relationship between gun control and lower crime rate and found no evidence of this correlation.

There are thousands of people that own guns in the United States. People have owned guns for the entire duration of American history. Even pre-dating the formation of the country, there were the Massachusetts minutemen who owned their own firearms and used them to defend themselves against oppression. Many lawmakers now want to go against these principles of allowing gun ownership for civilians (Dreier 92). They want to challenge the freedoms that have built the United States into the nation that it is today. They want to challenge the freedoms that Americans are specifically promised in the second amendment of the Constitution. All lawmakers need to stop consider the effects that will come into play with the creation of gun control laws.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosions (ATF) is a federal law enforcement organization within the United States Department of Justice. Its responsibilities are very important. Which includes the investigation and prevention of federal offenses. These offenses include the unlawful use, manufacture, and possession of firearms and explosives; acts of bombings; and illegal trafficking of alcohol and tobacco products. Federal Regulations are issued by federal agencies, commissions, and boards. They explain how the agency intends to carry out the law. Federal Regulations are created through a process known as rulemaking.

Gun violence is the most common type of crime that occurs on a regular basis. Despite having a decline in gun violence from 1992-2012, gun violence cases are still severely high. Kwon conducted a study to evaluate the effectiveness of the Brady Bill (1993). The study concluded that the existence of gun control laws had a deterrent effect on firearm deaths. However, the estimations of the actual effect may be lower than predicted by their regression model. Koper conducted a similar study on the effects of the 1994 Weapons Ban, and determined that it did not have a significant impact on gun violence. Webster examined public opinion polls and found that stricter gun regulation was more widely accepted after the Sandy Hook shooting. Studies show,

It seems to me that the states have a huge say in what laws affect gun control. I would like to think that all the states could adopt the same laws that affect gun control. This would be a difficult tasker for the states but would make it easier to enforce some standards of gun control. If each state defines a domestic crime differently all the defended would need to do is moving to a state with easier laws to gain access to a legal weapon.

Many decades ago, the United States was once a great country in which a gun was considered to be needed and essential to survive and protect your family. “As Americans civilized the wilderness, they would eventually be able to rely not just on their own skills at individual self-defense for protection, but on laws and civil authorities and the other institutions of government they were building ” ( Whitney, Pg. 103). The United States did not have the amount of civil authorities that we have today. Americans back then had to rely on their guns to protect themselves as laws changed and were made. Times were different in early America and that is a big reason why the Second Amendment was ideal. Guns, such as the AK-47, had not existed yet. Firearms in the early years were too slow to load and that is one of the reasons why gun control was not such a serious issue In the early United States History. Gun control has become necessary throughout our history as different types of guns have emerged and people became interested for our civic duty but for the entertainment ,or even violence.

Having a gun readily available can empower an individual to commit a violent crime by escalating the level of violence and potentially produce a murder had no firearm been available. (Conklin, 2013, p. 226). In Japan, their policy of ownership of firearms is stringent. Nevertheless, in Switzerland, traditionally interpersonal disputes are not settled using guns. Accordingly, Switzerland has a low rate of criminal violence. (Conklin, 2013, p. 226). There is “little to no conclusive evidence to show that gun ownership among the larger population is, per se, an important cause of criminal violence” (Conklin, 2013, p. 226). Furthermore, it would appear that armed citizens do have a deterrent effect on crime. (Wright, Rossi, 1983, p. 1). In summary, my opinion is that gun control of law abiding citizens is not the answer to effectively reducing crime in the United States; controlling how the offenders obtain guns could be.