The Second Amendment of the U.S.
Constitution 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.” Whether or whether not the United States should implement stricter gun laws has been a controversial issue for a long time. “Gun control” is the popular name for laws that aspire to restrict or regulate guns by choosing who the government deems most suitable to sell, buy, and possess certain firearms in order to reduce the crime rate. Supporters of gun control most oftenly call for laws that restrict law-abiding people, the only people who will obey them. Many pro gun control advocates believe that gun control does not go against the Constitution, even though the Second Amendment is the very thing that gives citizens the right to bear Arms.
A sizable argument for gun control is that a higher number of guns mean a higher number of deaths. Statistics prove that that statement is incorrect. Certain restrictions on firearms have been implemented before, and results were not good. Also, many American citizens use guns everyday to protect themselves, their families, and others.
“Gun control” laws are usually proposed on the grounds they will stop the criminal misuse of firearms, but criminals do not obey laws. Laws prohibiting the possession of a firearm are unlikely to stop a person already willing to commit a crime. A lot of people argue that gun control is the right solution to limit the violence in America, but gun control is not the answer, and would hurt the United States, not help.Gun control has been attempted before. Over the past century, all types of gun control laws have been enacted in different parts of the United States.
Everything from purchase restrictions to complete gun bans has been tried. The gun restriction laws have not worked, and in some cases have had the opposite effect from what was intended. There is still murder in the places where guns are not allowed.
A vast majority of mass shootings occur in gun-free zones (Bandler, 2016). Also, it is statistically proven that most places with strict gun laws increased in homicide rate after the laws were enacted. In the year 1976, Washington D.C.
implemented a law banning all citizens, except law enforcement, from owning guns. Those who already owned a gun were allowed to keep it, if it was disassembled or trigger-locked. The only way a trigger-lock could be removed is if the owner was given permission from the Washington D.C. police, which was very uncommon.
Washington D.C.’s gun ban ended up worsening the city’s homicide rate. Annual homicides in D.C.
inclined from 188 in 1976 to 364 in 1988. It increased more in 1993 to 454 homicides. The gun law was enacted to protect citizens, but instead it nearly doubled the homicide rate in just twelve years. The gun ban was eventually rule as unconstitutional, and was struck down.
Homicides have steadily declined since then to 88 yearly homicides in 2012. Washington D.C. still has some of the strictest gun laws in the country and is also known as one of the most dangerous places in the country to live in (Bandler, 2016).In 1997, the United Kingdom banned handguns after a man shot 16 elementary students, and then proceeded to shoot himself.
The United Kingdom’s homicide rate increased drastically as a result of the gun ban (The Crux, 2014). There was an 89 percent spike in gun crimes from 1998 to 2009, which occurred after the ban. Firearm offenses went from 5,209 a year, to 9865 a year (Slack, 2009). The year 2010 is the only year where the homicide rate is lower than it was in 1996. The immediate effect of gun control in Great Britain was about a 50 percent increase in homicide rates ( Crime Prevention Research Center, 2013).
The Orlando nightclub shooting happened in a gun-free zone. The shooting that killed famous singer Christina Grimmie in June happened in a gun-free zone (Bandler, 2016). The Fort Lauderdale airport shootings in January that killed five people and injured six also happened in a gun-free zone. According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, 98.4 percent of mass shootings from the 1950’s to July 10th of 2017, occurred in gun-free zones. Only 1.
6 percent of shootings happened where citizens are allowed to have firearms with them (Slack, 2009). A few months ago, a ISIS sympathizer planned a shooting at one of the largest churches in Detroit. An FBI wire recorded him explaining why he had picked the church as a target. The ISIS sympathizer explained, “It’s easy, and a lot of people go there. Plus people are not allowed to carry guns in church. Plus it would make the news.
” ( Lott, 2016). One of the reasons the church was chosen was because people are not allowed to have guns in the church, therefore, people wouldn’t be able to protect themselves from the shooter. A lot of law-abiding citizens use guns as self-defense against criminals. Guns are used as self-defense as many as 2.5 million times a year, or about 6,850 times a day. About 200,000 women use a gun every year to defend themselves against sexual abuse.
Less than eight percent of the time, the victim will kill or wound his or her attacker (Gun Owners of America, 2015). Statistically, guns save more lives than they take. A man named Stephen Willeford heroically saved many lives last Sunday at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas. Devin Kelley, the killer, opened fire in the church. Willeford showed up with a rifle.
His quick actions forced the shooter to stop his attack, presumably saving the lives of the twenty wounded and everyone else that was in attendance in the church. If it was not for Stephen Wolleford, and his rifle, those innocent civilians might not be here today (Lott, 2017). Imagine a person breaking into your own home, with the intent of hurting you and your family. In Walton County, Georgia, a man broke into the home of a woman and her young twin children. The robber used a crowbar to bust open the front door. Alarmed by the noise, the mother called out for her children.
The trespasser then chased the family into a crawl space near the attic, and when he opened the door to get to the family, the mother opened fire shooting him five times (Meredith Corporation, 2015). What would you do? Would you use a gun if it meant protecting your family?Monica Jones, a woman from St. Louis, saved the life of a twelve-year-old girl, with her shotgun. Police said the victim was grabbed at a bus stop, and dragged into the apartment building where Ms. Jones lives with her three children. The man ripped off the young girl’s clothing and tried to rape her, but the girl managed to break loose and run into the hallway, where she was met by Ms.
Jones, police said. Monica Jones recalls talking on the telephone when she heard the screaming. Ms.Jones stated in an interview “I cracked my door and I saw this child butt naked and him half- clothed.
I screamed at him to let her go, and he told me to go away. She was screaming: ‘Please help me.’ ” At that point she knew that she had to do something. Monica Jones got her single-barrel shotgun.
She pointed it at the attacker as he tried to drag the girl into his apartment, and told him that if he moved she would shoot him. The man was charged with kidnapping and attempted rape. Monica Jones has bought the firearm only a month prior (Nowell).
If that gun was not at hand, it’s hard to say what would have happened to that young girl.If you are writing an essay with a pen and you misspell a word, is it the pens fault? No. If you were driving under the influence, and hit someone with your car is it the cars fault? No. The same thing goes for a gun. It is not the gun that kills someone, it’s the person behind the gun that pulls the trigger. People murder with or without guns, and if a criminal is already willing to break a law by someone, they are most likely willing to break another law that prohibits the use of guns. If every gun in the United States was obtained, Murder would still exist in our nation.
Knives and other cutting instruments are dangerous too. Knives and other cutting instruments were used to kill 280 people in California, 175 people in Texas, and 130 people in New York (FBI: UCR, 2016). So, should we also ban knives? Getting rid of guns will not get rid of Crime. So, if we did away with all guns and knives there should be no Murder in the United States. Right? Actually that is incorrect. Numerous of people were also murdered with weapons other than guns and knives. Other weapons were used to kill 193 people in California, 136 people in Texas, and 99 people in New York (FBI: UCR, 2016).
Guns are dangerous, but so is every weapon. Even if we outlawed every weapon in the United States, there would still be Murder. There was 89 murders in California, 82 murders in Texas, and 32 murders in New York, caused by a person using only their bare hands (FBI: UCR, 2016). We are willing to discuss banning guns for “killing people”. So, should we also discuss banning hands, because they also kill people? People have been killing since the dawn of time. It’s awful and sad, but getting rid of guns is not going to fix that problem. what we really want to ban is violence, murder, and insanity.Many citizens who are for gun control often plee that gun control does not violate the Second Amendment.
They believe that the Constitution is outdated, and needs to be revised. Pro gun control advocates believe that the founding fathers had no way of knowing how advanced firearms would become, and that when writing the Constitution they were referred to muskets. Weapon have been evolving since the beginning of mankind. The founding fathers were smart. There is no way that they didn’t anticipate any kind of technological advancement in weaponry whatsoever.
Also, by the time the Second Amendment was being written, assault weapons already existed. The belton flintlock was developed during the Revolutionary War. It could fire twenty rounds in 5 seconds with one pull of the finger. The girandoni rifle, which had a twenty two high capacity round magazine that could accurately be fired within 30 seconds was also created during the Revolutionary War.
This gun was also later used by Thomas Jefferson to famously outfit the lewis and clark expedition. Those are just two of the many guns that were used during, and before that time era (Truth Revolt, 2015). Either the United States Constitution has the power to protect our freedoms or it does not.Pro gun control advocates also believe that more guns equal more homicide.
They believe that the large number of firearms in America is what makes our homicide rate so high. This theory is wrong. The United States is the number one most heavily armed nation, with 112.6 guns per 100 residents (Hawkins, 2016).
A CRS report showed that privately owned firearms escalated from 192 million in the U.S. in 1994, to 310 million in 2009. At the same time this increase in guns was happening, there was a decrease in firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide. The rate which was 6.6 per 100,000 Americans in 1993–fell to 3.
6 per 100,000 by 2000. Gun sales continued to jump, and the “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate fell to 3.2 in 2011 (Hawkins, 2016).Whether you are liberal or conservative; Republican or Democrat, we all believe that the gun violence in America is appalling and disgusting. Gun control however, is not the solution for this problem. Implementing gun control laws would make gun violence worse, not better. Guns save lives every day.
Also, if America were to enact stricter gun laws, the law wouldn’t affect the people already willing to break the law. Therefore, the people’s right to possess a gun should not be infringed.