A ban on gun ownership
What first comes to your mind when you hear the word gun? Do you feel happy, relieved and excited? If yes, then you had better seek help from a psychologist. A gun itself is not dangerous. It becomes a disastrous weapon when it is carried and misused by human. Gun-related tragedies in the US have always incurred controversy on whether guns should be banned. The recent news titled “Man shot five because of way wife cooked his eggs” demonstrates the urgent need to revise current gun control laws. (Jackson, 2010) The man could use the destructive weapon to shoot whoever he wanted. If the man didn’t carry a gun but a knife, the casualty would be much reduced as knifes are not as catastrophic as guns. The misuse of firearms can lead to dire consequences and endangers the lives of all citizens. Should the US government remain silent, showing no sign of sympathy towards the victims in these gun cases? Definitely not, the US government should abolish the right of gun ownership immediately. The right of gun ownership in the US was noted in the Second Amendment in 1791. The aim of this law was “to preserve and guarantee the pre-existing right of individuals to keep and bear arms.” (Kleck, 2010) It stated that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, bear arms, shall not be infringed.” (FindLaw, 1997) From then on, peoples’ right of keeping and bearing arms was protected under the Second Amendment. By keeping arms, people can also defend against tyranny. Whenever the government is dishonest, they can still protect themselves and fight against the government as to strive for their own right and fabricate a stable and prosperous society. However, the use of guns is counterproductive to the aim in protecting oneself and is mainly used for violence, putting citizen’s life into jeopardy. In April 1999, the Columbine high school massacre, which “resulted in the deaths of 14 students and a teacher”, has reflected on the destructiveness of guns. (OpenSecrets) It was believed that two murderers were psychopaths, heightening the degree of danger when carrying guns. So guns were actually a threat to the security of society as people did not mainly use them in self defense. “A gun is 22 times more likely to be used in a completed or attempted suicide, criminal assault or homicide, or unintentional shooting death or injury than to be used in a self-defense shooting.” (Kellermann, 1998, p. 263). People are suffered from the permission of using guns as the majority uses guns in the sense of violence. Moreover, from the California Health Interview Surveys in 2001, “5800 adolescents found that the typical California teen was 13 times more likely to be the victim of a gun threat than to have used a gun in self defense” (David, 2009) They are not mature enough to handle guns. But the fact that guns can be easily obtained has triggered the serious injuries of teenagers in California. Having read the news of firearm-related violence and survey conducted by various organizations, firearms are mainly used for violence instead of self defense which should be forbidden as to obey the original intention. Having a free gun control law, teen firearm-related deaths are recorded much higher in the US than in other countries. According to a research on the firearm deaths in 23 high-income countries in 2003, it shows that “87% of all children aged 0 to 14 killed by firearms were US children.”(Lippincott, 2010) The death rate is almost 7 times higher than that of the combined 22 other countries. This is due to the lenient gun law in the US. Children can have easy access to guns that may lead to a huge casualty. Also, though “the rates of assault with knives and with guns are similar, there are five times as many deaths from gun assaults as from knife assaults.” (Zimring, 1997) Despite using another weapon, death is a more likely outcome if guns are used. So in order to eradicate tragedies, we should...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document