Furthermore, some states can create
Furthermore, some states can create
Strict Gun Control (SGC) is defined as a “collection of legally authorized limitations designed to impose firearm shortage on the general residents” (Lance K). In the USA everyone has right to own anything or right to purchase whatever they want. In the same way people are purchasing the guns for different views. Some of them are purchasing to protect themselves and also they think that they have right to own it. Whereas, the others believe that they earn money by harming or blacking others. The best example is the death of an international student Sai Kiran Goud .On June 15, 2015 this 21 year male, doing his masters at the university in Miami was apparently waylaid by a group of suspected robbers. As he refused to give his iPhone he was killed…
Various thoughts on gun regulation have been recommended to the press, local government, and people in power at the federal level. Most of which are quickly rejected as they are expected to fail or are unable to make it through Congress due to inside politics. An idea that has not yet been pushed through Congress is allowing all responsible citizens to carry firearms with the potential consequence of a minimum five year prison sentence along with fines if the weapon is not used by the carrier in a situation of self-defense. With those laws in place, criminals may consider alternatives before violating their next victim with a firearm. This will also help to cut down on straw-purchases of firearms.…
John Smith is a 15 year old student. He comes home from school and finds the police are at his house. The police then tell him that his mother has been shot and killed. The heartache, the grief, and the horror that goes through him as he hears this is unbearable. Smith’s pain could have been prevented with a gun. According to polled felons, 3/5 of them won’t target an armed victim. That means three out of five crimes could have been stopped if only the victim had a gun. Altering the gun laws we have now would make it so that more lives would be lost and would also be unconstitutional. That is why we must not alter the gun laws we have now.…
When we look at gun-related events, such as a school shooting, or a massacre, our first knee-jerk reaction is to immediately blame guns for the crime. Stricter laws will surely stop those law-breaking criminals, right? As if the time of the writing of the article from procon.org, 49 out of the 62 mass shootings were done with legal guns. At least, that's one less crime committed, right? Would leaving ourselves defenseless while criminals acquire guns illegally instead be a better method protection? My partner and I believe that stricter gun control laws should not be passed, due to the fact that the Constitution protects the right to own guns, criminals who commit crimes with guns would likely not mind breaking another law to acquire said gun,…
Many Americans believe that Gun-Control Laws should be enforced, because “Individuals do not need guns for protection; it is the role of local and federal government to protect the people through law enforcement agencies and the military.” (http://www.StudentNewsDaily.com) All Individuals deserve the right to carry a gun with them at all times, to use for protection. According to the Second Amendment in the Constitution, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” (https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/second_amendment) Obtaining a gun, gives one the sense of feeling safe and protected given any situation. No one knows when they may be “attacked” or in danger, and the protection they need from the government may not always be there to protect them. Every American must learn self-defense and use it when needed, they shouldn’t have to rely and anyone but themselves.…
The U.S. has been in a hot debate over a tough issue for hundreds of years now. The subject of that debate is gun control laws. With mass murders and break-ins happening all over America it brings up two groups of people. One group believes taking away the guns will solve the problem. I believe, along with lots of other people, that taking away the guns will not solve the problem. We need to protect our Second Amendment, as well as ourselves, and stick to our guns.…
Every day, dozens or even hundreds of people find themselves victims of gun violence. 30,000 people on average are killed each year by firearms while 64% of all firearm deaths are suicides, and firearms are the third-leading cause of injury-related deaths nationwide. ("Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence," May 11, 2015). With those statistics, it would make sense why people think that gun control is the answer, and some regulations like background checks and increased penalties for those convicted of using guns in crimes are needed.…
Some people believe there should be stricter laws regarding firearms. These people believe there would be fewer deaths and homicides. It is also thought that there should be stricter gun laws or even bans on military guns and accessories. I believe that stricter laws won't affect gun deaths and homicides. Guns are not the problem. Having stricter laws will not prevent criminals from getting guns. Gun ownership helps limit criminal activity.…
Do firearms encourage misconduct? Many Americans choose to believe they do. With gun control being a controversial topic throughout society, it has its consequences. Because gun violence has recently been a prevalent issue, gun control is at the forefront of political leaders’ decision making, however, gun control places law abiding citizens at a disadvantage.…
With heated debates and arguments about gun control, politicians are forced into “trying” to find a solution. Gun control is a popular subject though does have slow process process in America. Twice in the past two years the gun issue has reached the nation’s highest court. In the 2008 Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller the court ruled that the Constitution protects an individual’s right to own a gun for personal use. But the decision only applied to federal laws and failed to address local and state laws. Thus, in July 2010 the Supreme Court ruled that the federal right to bear arms also applies at the state and local level. The ruling lifted a nearly 30-year-old Chicago gun ban. Obama calls for a “Sense of Urgency” to fight gun violence in a video recorded by “CNN”. Obama advocates for a better and improved ways to distribute guns such as creating more or hiring more people to do background checks. Obama having a Democratic viewpoint, respects the 2nd amendment but wants to bend it to what he believes will decrease violence. On the hand republicans believe the Second Amendment guarantees an individual's right to gun ownership and that government efforts at regulation were unconstitutional. Ownership of guns should be up to the people and not by the government. These two viewpoints besides abolishing the 2nd amendment is what separates American citizens attitudes toward gun control. In…
In the wake of multiple shootings such as the theatre shooting in Aurora, Colorado, should U.S. gun control laws be reformed, or would that result in the violation of constitutional rights? From the day the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was adopted on December 15, 1791, giving U.S. citizens the right to carry firearms, the issue of gun control has been the subject of many debates. And the effects of more strictly regulated Gun control would be detrimental to our society. Gun control is unreasonable for the following reasons: 1) the right to own and carry weapons is granted by the Constitution and upheld by the Supreme Court, 2) the majority of U.S. gun owners…
The word safe has many different definitions when in the context of firearms. Many republicans believe that the country will not be safe until citizens can freely defend themselves, their families, and their homes through the use of weapons, if necessary. In contrast, many democrats believe that the nation will not be safe until guns are taken out of the hands of all individuals, with the exception of police and federal agents. Since Obama is democratic, his views of safety relate closely to the average democratic view, however his plans in his executive action are far from unconstitutional. The White House claims that in an effort to make the nation safer, Obama’s executive order calls for a limitation on the size of magazines (“FACTS”). In not so distant history, this limitation on the size of magazines could have prevented the deaths of numerous individuals. Adam Lanza, the man who committed the acts of violence against Sandy Hook Elementary School was armed with two pistols and a Bushmaster .223 caliber AR-15 assault rifle (“The Promise”). He loaded—and reloaded— the firearms with “ten 30-round high-capacity magazines and twenty 20-round magazines,” and these 700 rounds were enough to kill everyone in the school” (“The Promise”). It was only during the brief moments in which he was changing magazines that several children were able to escape. If Lanza had been limited to standard 10-round magazines, he would have had to reload 16 times instead of six, thus providing more time for the children to escape, resulting in less unnecessary deaths. With this one tragedy, it is evident that Obama’s plan to reduce the size of magazines is beneficial and can lead to less fatalities, which in return makes the nation safer…
If we enacted more gun control laws then there wouldn't be as much problems. Gun shootings are the main reason why the kill rate is going up. That being the main cause is just something we need to stop. Gun laws are causes of violent crime in the world and it must need to be changed for people to buy guns easier to protect themselves.Gun control will help everyone in the world because it would make the world way safer.If there were more gun control laws enacted the world would be a safer place because more gun control laws would reduce gun deaths. Guns are rarely used in self defense and The presence of a gun makes a conflict more likely to become violent.…
Does a person have the right to defend themselves? If a person does not have a criminal record, it’s their right if they want a gun or not. Gun control is not effective in the United States. Americans have rights and one of them is the 2nd amendment. People have the right to defend themselves.…
The first mass shooting was in Austin, Texas in 1966 by Charles Whitman at the University of Texas. He snipped fourteen people and wounded thirty-two others in less than ninety minutes. Students used their weapons from their vehicles and helped police take him down. Democratic parties are scared to bring up the topic of gun control because they fear that they will lose votes to the people that do not want gun control. Gun laws are intended to limit the amount of guns in an area and lower crime rates, but people with mental problems do not follow those rules. They set their minds on killing people and that is what they do. If gun control became stricter, then there would still be gun violence because criminals would be armed making unarmed citizens easy targets. No one can stop them because they are set on killing no matter what. They do not have to suffer the consequences of killing the people they do because most of them kill themselves when they are about to get caught or after they finish what they planned to do.…