Gun Control Laws Essay
Should the United States have stricter gun-control laws?
Research from Dr. John Lott states that with a higher gun ownership rate come fewer mass shootings. From 1977 to 1999 right-to-carry laws decreased the frequency and severity of mass shootings. The terror attack in Orlando and the shooting that killed Christina Grimmie both occurred in gun-free zones. One of the main reasons murderers do that is because they don’t want to be stopped by an armed civilian.
People say the gun-free zones will stop mass shootings, but the reality is that they won’t. Did you know that almost all of the mass shootings in the U.S. since 1950 occurred in a gun-free zone. Which means law-abiding citizens cannot carry guns. These gun-free zone just hurt us …show more content…
The majority of other firearm deaths include rifles, and shotguns. Some of the weapons used in many more deaths include the hammer, which is seen as a tool for construction or home improvement. These “weapons” somewhat can be used more than some firearms. Kitchen knives are actually used in half of all stabbings in the United Kingdom. A group of doctors even called for a ban on long pointed kitchen knives. Even knives are used more than some firearms most of the time. Based on the death toll bannings tools such as clubs, hammers, and knives would actually be statistically better than banning guns. Dr. John Lott states that there are 320 million people in America and only 628,000 police officers, so it’s impossible for them to protect everybody. That is just one more reason to have citizens armed. John Lott also states that there is a direct correlation between higher gun ownership and reducing police killings. There is even a 3.6% decrease in police killings of every percentage point increase in those owning a firearm. Studies by Lott also found that from 2013-2015 six states that banned open carry resulted in higher police
Research from Dr. John Lott states that with a higher gun ownership rate come fewer mass shootings. From 1977 to 1999 right-to-carry laws decreased the frequency and severity of mass shootings. The terror attack in Orlando and the shooting that killed Christina Grimmie both occurred in gun-free zones. One of the main reasons murderers do that is because they don’t want to be stopped by an armed civilian.
People say the gun-free zones will stop mass shootings, but the reality is that they won’t. Did you know that almost all of the mass shootings in the U.S. since 1950 occurred in a gun-free zone. Which means law-abiding citizens cannot carry guns. These gun-free zone just hurt us …show more content…
The majority of other firearm deaths include rifles, and shotguns. Some of the weapons used in many more deaths include the hammer, which is seen as a tool for construction or home improvement. These “weapons” somewhat can be used more than some firearms. Kitchen knives are actually used in half of all stabbings in the United Kingdom. A group of doctors even called for a ban on long pointed kitchen knives. Even knives are used more than some firearms most of the time. Based on the death toll bannings tools such as clubs, hammers, and knives would actually be statistically better than banning guns. Dr. John Lott states that there are 320 million people in America and only 628,000 police officers, so it’s impossible for them to protect everybody. That is just one more reason to have citizens armed. John Lott also states that there is a direct correlation between higher gun ownership and reducing police killings. There is even a 3.6% decrease in police killings of every percentage point increase in those owning a firearm. Studies by Lott also found that from 2013-2015 six states that banned open carry resulted in higher police