Mass Media in America Today

In closing, many people who argue for unnecessarily high restrictions on firearms do not do research on the actual statistics and facts and instead rely on moral principles blame guns destructive possibilities without giving a thought of other options of destruction. Let us say that a ban was placed on firearms. Honestly, who would listen to this new governmental demand. Few law-abiding citizens would gladly hand over all firearms for the “perceived betterment of the state.” But more than likely many people would not turn over their weapons specifically criminals based on the fact they have not followed a law in their lives, thus making them criminals. The perceived notion that criminal organizations would just hand over the only thing that makes that old lady hand over her purse or the bank teller hand over the money is absurd and a fallacy of an idealistic world. If criminals are the only ones left with guns (omitting police and military,) who is going to stop them from looting a local store or home by the time the police get their it will be too late? Criminals would no longer have to fear the average Joe from pulling a gun on them while they rob him. If anything, crime would get even worse and criminals would become even more brazen and ludicrous. If we sent police and other law enforcement to retrieve the weapons from criminals tension between police and criminals would surely rise increasing violence against police. Also, as was seen during prohibition, people might try to make their own guns, just like bathtub gin, and end up blowing themselves up and causing more injury than with properly built firearms today. What will work is to develop a system that recognizes the different types of targets. So that trying to shoot a person would result in the gun not firing and authorities being called. This would help ensure that the guns still can be used for things like hunting and sport. Also, we need to help potential future criminals realize that they do not have