Gun-Control in the United States
With school starting on April 16, 2007, at Virginia Tech, an Asiatic insane young started a shooting massacre. Even though countless of police officers came to the university, they were not able to stop the massacre because the killer was well-armed with firearms which included automatic and semi-automatic assault weapons. The victims were not able to escape, they were simply waiting for the killer. The unpleasant incident left thirty-two dies. These incident is still in people’s minds and some of them are looking for guarantees that such an attack will not happen again. Lott (2007).
Is gun ownership the solution for all our social problems related with crimes? Massacres and the buildup of crime in the United States are factors that play a part on peoples’ election about having guns. In fact, everyday increase the number of people who have weapons. According to a 1994 Department of Justice survey, “About thirty percent of American household own 192 million firearms of which handguns constituted thirty percent of the total.” Thus present-days the percentage of people with firearms should be double. Even though some Americans hold firmly to the belief that should not be gun-control laws, the government of The United states should regulate gun ownership.
Those opposed to gun-control point out that gun-control laws is an ineffective crime-fighting tool. As John Lott an opponent of gun-control regulations wrote in the magazine Jurist’s Hotline, “In the U.S., states that require guns be locked up faced a five percent increase in murder and twelve percent increase in rapes.” Nevertheless, research supports precisely the opposite conclusion that there are more benefits of handgun regulations. First of all, gun-control laws may put a stop to some criminals and minors from buying through legal channels such as regular gun stores. Second, handgun regulations do not allow that some felons obtain licenses to carry concealed weapons. Thus, despite the headlines, schoolyard killings are down fifty percent since 1992 and the crime began declining since then. Also, the Department of Justice of the U.S.A. shows that violent juvenile crime by minors from 10 to 17 years old was down thirty percent since the Brady Law[1] (1994, Feb). Lastly, the laws that regulate the storage, carrying of firearms, and laws that control the possession of guns in public buildings have influenced in the drastic reduction of murder and crime rates.
Objectors of gun control also lend support to the view that having a gun at home makes a significant contribution to keep people safe. However, supporters of gun-control set out some powerful arguments in opposition to objectors` opinions. These arguments will shape people`s thinking. First of all, accidental dies caused by household guns are a perfect example of how unsafe is having household guns. “In many cases children were killed accidentally by a parent’s handgun,” states Bovard (1996, December 23). Second, defenders of gun-control laws show a statistic of the quantity of the dies related with household guns, “Nearly 500 children and teenagers each year are killed in gun-related accidents.” Thus, household guns instead of becoming a useful self-defense tool, they have become in the leading cause of dies and accidents at home.
The final argument by opponents of gun-control is that the background check provision[2] is illegal because it violates people’s rights. Nonetheless, defenders of gun-control strenuously defend background check because it lends a hand to authorities to identify people with misdemeanor convictions and felons. For instance, it allows to the police and owners of gun-stores to know what sorts of crimes have done people before trading firearms with them. The positive effect of using background check is the diminishing of junk guns or best know like Saturday night special[3]. In conclusion, the use of background check is an excellent tool to aim to minimize the extend of felons, minors, and irresponsible people who have weapons.
It should be palpable that the arguments in opposition to gun-control are not convincing. On the other hand, countless of people endorse having gun ownership regulations. Gun laws do not allow felons and minors to have a chance to buy neither high assault guns nor junk guns, so it means that the cases of murders, rapes, and other crimes will diminish. Conclusive evidence is shown in the good applications of the gun laws, and they demonstrate that they are useful and reliable. The main key is to effectively enforce the laws that are already in existence.
[1] The Brady Act regulates the sale of handguns and thus directly regulates commerce. It is an amendment to a comprehensive federal scheme for the regulation of firearms sales that unquestionably affect interstate commerce. The legislative history of the Brady Act also contains findings that gun violence affects commerce.
[2] A background check is a way to find information about someone that may not be readily available. Background checks are conducted through third party institutions and are meant to provide a picture of an individual's character based on past actions and records. Background checks reveal information about an individual's professional, financial, criminal, and public history. They include everything from speeding tickets to time spent in jail, and even employment history.
No comments:
Post a Comment