Dec 13, 2017 in Research

Gun Control

Every picture has a negative and a positive aspect. Therefore, gun control also has a diverse nature of impacts. Some people believe that gun control is essential in every region or any state.  Gun control means any law, practice, policy, or proposal created to limit or ban the sale, possession, production, importation and/or gun use. Gun control policies and laws are different around the world. Countries like the United Kingdom have quite strict limits on firearms possession while countries, like the United States have comparatively modest limits. People have argued a lot about gun control and claim that it does not prevent or reduce injuries, murders, or suicides committed with guns, that firearms restriction is a repression tool used by totalitarian governments, so that such restriction would violate individual freedom, including the right for self-defense and protection from genocide caused by the state. Gun control is essential in reducing the crime rate as well as self-defense as gun is often treated as a deadly killing machine that is simply to blame for a large number of homicides.

Gun control is the only factor through which an individual can get a sigh of relief. In contrast, some people claim that through gun control they are not able to have self-defense by keeping guns away from them. Both aspects have logical points and are debatable (Lott, 2013). According to the researches carried out in the sphere of gun control, in 2009, the population in the United States was 307 million people. 300 million firearms were possessed by the citizens of the U.S. and one hundred million of them were handguns.

The history of gun use is long, interesting and controversial. Since 1791, a lot of changes have been made concerning the regulations related to the manufacturing, selling, and transporting firearms in the U.S. Since the origin of guns, people have used it for self-defense from wild animals and uncultivated people. Later, people changed their desires and used it as an interest. A lot of types of activities enhance crime rate, since some people use the guns due to their interest in them. For that reason, they feel the need to harass other people by waving their guns around.

There is a drumbeat growing all over the country, that we should start to ban firearms to prevent and reduce violence, even when 50 years ago, about 75% of homicides were done with knives, baseball bats and fists. No doubt, making just another unconstitutional law will create the look of something being done. Nowadays, a number of people, forces, and the government have stated that guns are banned. Therefore, statistics show that crime rates are decreasing. It is known to the public that human beings are stubborn in nature and are known to do such things, which is prohibited to them. Similarly, crimes like street robbery, murders, assaults, etc. are not completely vanished from people’s lives. For that same reason, the majority of people claim that having guns must not be accepted even though people want to have guns for their personal safety. This is the only thing through which they can protect themselves from the danger of others. Hence, one of the main reasons why people possess gun is self-defense.

People who own guns do not have psychological problems and they are not more racist or violent than others. Owing gun for defensive purposes is more likely to be a personal response to dangerous circumstances in life perceived. Also, it is a response to police that cannot provide proper protection. Response to dangers is not necessarily driven by fear, but rather may be a preparation for the possibility of being a victim. Gun ownership is all about hunting, being a man, being an older and better life with wealth, living in villages or small towns, being raised in the South.

Due to the fact that gun followers are increasing the bandwagon effect for self-defense, an entire group is claiming that their objective or plan is not to eliminate all guns from the state. For that reason, they have planned to compel constraints or limitations on automatic weapons and high-capacity magazines. The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution has given authority to its populace to bear firearms without any encroachment (Spano & Bolland, 2013).   

Owning a firearm can lead to a feeling of self-confidence due to the fact that if an individual carries a gun, he or she feels protected. This protection is essential in this era of violence that we live in today since everyone has a great fear of being prey to any criminal. Crime is easily visible on streets, subways, etc. Therefore it has become like second nature for citizens to carry a weapon with them in order to feel that they can retaliate against the criminals. Consequently, gun control would be harmful for those who hold arms solely for safety purposes, and not with the intention of harming others (Swanson et al., 2013). 

People are skeptical about the gun control value and argue that the world without firearms would be desirable, but it is just impossible. But summarized evidence raises a radical opportunity – the world with no firearms can be less safe than when non-aggressive people had guns and aggressors somehow did not. If gun ownership among prospective victims may decrease the violence rate, then reducing such possession of firearms is not good for society. Hope to disarm non-criminals to reduce access to firearms among criminals is an expensive policy.

In reaction to the current mass destruction in this country including the slaughtering of 20 first grade students in Newton, Conn, and 12 moviegoers in Aurora, Colorado, President Obama has planned a proposal to constrict gun-control laws. It is an International Gun Control Treaty that was signed by President Obama on June, 3rd 2013. This treaty is titled as U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). This plan includes worldwide settings for gun sales, restoration and intensification of attack weapon laws of prohibition. It restricts ammunition magazines to a 10-round capacity. After the execution of this treaty, numbers of resource officers and counselors will be assigned to schools. More police officers are needed to put on the streets in order to remove street crime. Another aspect is to ascertain a strong penalty for gun holders and a larger offering for a wide-ranging insurance coverage for mental rehabilitation. ATT also offers the managerial division of government along with extensive authority for controlling the number of guns that come in and out of the country. This involves vague language that gun-control-friendly management can have this advantage.

This treaty is apparently designed at putting an end to gun trafficking in transversely intercontinental boundaries. Critics of this treaty have also showed their arguments. Breitbart News and National Rifle Association (NRA) argued that it will need a worldwide gun registry with the aim of it being enforceable. Although President Obama has signed this treaty, it will be enforceable only when it is approved by the two-third majority of the Senate. Therefore, President Obama’s signature has opened an approval platform to the Senate for a future date.

Gun owner license policies require people to obtain a license in order to possess a gun according to the law, even in your own house. The applicant must pass through official records check in order to find out if they have disqualifying traits including mental illness or alcoholism, only then a person can obtain a license. Registration systems simply record the purchase or possession of a firearm, linking each firearm with a specific owner. Despite significant variation in gun control harshness and rates of firearm ownership across cities in the U.S., there is no significant evidence that these have any direct impact on violence rates, although they do impact the rate with which firearms are used in different kinds of violence. But, the rate with which firearms are carried may have an influence on robbery, which gun possession levels do not, and gun possession within specific high-risk subsets of people may have an influence on violence levels, which common firearm ownership rates do not. Therefore, it is not worth ignoring the importance of the few gun control restrictions which are considered to be efficient.

Thus, gun control is essential for maintaining the use of lethal weapons, since inappropriate use of guns can lead to immense outcomes. Moreover, proper use of gun control will lead individuals to steer away from violent occurrences. Gun control serves as a boundary for criminals in getting their hands on these easily accessible weapons which lead to deteriorating the rate of violent crimes. In spite of the number of advantages and disadvantages of gun control, the question remains controversial as both opponents and proponents try to convince the rightness of their idea. However, gun control is really minor, if not completely irrelevant, part of the violence problem, just as firearms are insignificant as a cause of the problem. The United States has more violence problems than any other nation for reasons not connected with its extremely high firearm ownership.

Related essays