The Argument For Stricter Gun Control Laws

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s): 305
  • Published: November 9, 2008
Read full document
Text Preview
I am writing a persuasive argument in favor of stricter gun control laws. I am

very passionate about this topic because the use of firearms in the wrong hands is a

deadly prophecy. It can be in the form of children getting a hold of a gun and hurting

themselves or others, an adult with violent propensities mishandling a weapon, or

someone who wants the use of a firearm in aiding suicide. When one looks at the

increased incident of injury to children, homicide, and suicide, it is clear there is a need

for stricter gun control laws. This paper argues that firearms continue to play a dominant

role in violence both criminal and accidental regardless of laws such as the five-day

waiting period and the Brady Law. I will show how easier access to guns, rather than

preventing crime, creates more of it through the use of examples and statistics

Those whom are opposed to gun control laws do not like to admit there is a link

between access to guns and violence. The NRA says "guns don't kill people, people kill

people." They will claim that the right to bear arms for self-defense and civil rights

would be diminished. However, this view is only one sided and it fails to address the link

between the ownership of guns and the violence that occurs because of it.

Almost everyday we can open up a newspaper or turn on a national news

broadcast on the television and discover a new case of someone being killed by the use of

a gun. Perhaps it was a child whom had access to his/her parents gun they keep in the

house for self defensive purposes, an adult whom was an innocent bystander during a

workplace massacre or robbery, a shooting at a school by a disturbed kid, or a domestic

dispute turned deadly. Unfortunately, it is rare that a day goes by that we do not hear

about one of the above events. Whatever the case may be, it is apparent that too many

people have access to firearms and that access must be restricted.

The Brady Campaign is one that enforces gun control laws, elects pro gun

control public officials, and informs the public about gun violence. It was enacted in

1994 and because of it, all 50 states must do background checks on anyone wishing to

purchase a firearm. While this has helped quell some gun violence that may have

occurred otherwise, there are still too many who are falling through the cracks. These

background checks are targeting the wrong people and criminals are still able to obtain

guns from illegal sources. Take a look at the Virginia Tech massacre last spring. This

reopened the legislative debate over gun control that was never resolved from the

Columbine high school shootings eight years earlier. Many wonder how Cho-Seung Hui

was able to get his hands on powerful automatic weaponry that killed thirty two of his

classmates. This proves that the background checks performed are insufficient and need

to be more thorough. More than fifty survivors and family members of this tragedy

signed a letter to Congress with one simple message- finish work on legislation that could

prevent future tragedies.

The notion of more complete background checks leads me to another issue that is

the abolition of handguns. More handguns are used in criminal acts than any other type

of firearm. The FBI reports that more than 60 percent of murders are caused by guns and

handguns account for 70 percent of these. Lets look at some scenarios that stem from the

lack of access to handguns: Sure, anyone with a penchant for killing could pull out a

knife or a baseball bat but the victim has much better chance of survival. The likelihood

of injury and not death are much greater as the victim may be able to get away. The next

scenario are home burglaries. Most of these occur with the occupants are out of the house

so the need for a gun inside the home is unnecessary. If there is a gun inside of the home,

the perpetrator...
tracking img