A Review of Literature
INTRODUCTION
The United States has currently been struggling with a great deal of political warfare, social unrest and public protest from the inside and from terrorism, global criticism and immigration battles from the outside. There are so many issues that the subjects of debate seem endless. One of the most controversial and often debated issues today is gun control. There is no doubt that it is incredibly dangerous when offenders are armed when they commit crimes like burglary or in a car-jacking; more so when these offenders have every premeditated intent to kill. At the same time, not everyone who owns and uses a gun is destined to do wrong with it or pose a risk or danger to anyone else. There is a great deal of public debate as to whether enacting stricter gun control laws would deter crime, lessen the number of guns in circulation and, therefore, low gun crime statistics and overall gun deaths is a dramatic way. As well-intended as these kinds of laws may be, there are many argue that Americans have a right “to bear arms.” That right is protected by the United States Constitution. They, also, argue that restrictive gun laws enacted on law-abiding citizens has very little to do with illegal crime committed by armed offenders. In order to see this issue in an objective stand point it will be necessary to look at information that offers research to both sides of the issue, as well as, analyze those facts. Do stricter guns laws truly make U.S. cities safer? After reviewing the resources, it becomes clear that gun ownership, use, misuse, the current laws and the possible control policies is a highly complex issue that will only be resolved through proactive compromise.
LITERATURE REVIEW
The two sides of the issue regarding gun control offer a number of different reasons as to why gun control is or is not a realistic approach to reducing gun violence on a national scale. The expert opinions offered at the ProCon Organization in 2016 are helpful in addressing the greatest points of the arguments made by those that both support strict gun control and those that do not.
Supporters of Strict Gun Control
` Not a Constitutional Right: Supporters of stricter gun law policies argue that the Second Amendment rights mentioned in the Constitution a right to an armed militia to defend against outside invasion an even to keep the government from taking over; it was not specifically intended to guard the rights of individual citizens owning firearms (ProCon Organization, 2016).
Strict Gun Controls will Reduce Gun Deaths: For so many the commons sense view on firearms is if one takes away the guns, the guns cannot be used and, therefore, no more gun deaths. If people cannot have access to firearms then the chance of them being misused or used in a crime will also disappear (ProCon Organization, 2016).
Guns Kill: This is one of the oldest and most controversial of the gun control argument. If guns are present in the public realms then eventually it will be mishandle, misused and result in serious injuries and death. They argue that guns can kill just by being present, by encouraging more violence in a given situation (ProCon Organization, 2016).
Armed Civilians: For many supporters strict gun laws are needed to prevent the people from arming themselves whenever they go anywhere. Armed civilians will only make it harder for law enforcement to do their job and would only escalate problems if they attempted to step up to, for example, stop a crime from occurring; this will only make such a situation more dangerous for bystanders (ProCon Organization, 2016).
Gun Control Will Lower Suicide Rates: Many people have heard that guns are often the weapon of choice when someone options to take their lives; we hear about it in the news and see it in films and movies. Shooting oneself in the head is the most succinct way of guaranteeing their death in most cases. That being said if fewer guns were available illegally and there were fewer guns in peoples’ homes then there would be one less means of suicide (ProCon Organization, 2016).
Gun Control Prevents Crime: Supporters of stricter gun control laws argue that fewer guns will result in fewer crimes all across the board; less theft, less assaults and, definitely, less acts of murder; including mass murder (ProCon Organization, 2016).
Opposition to Strict Gun Control
Constitutional Rights: The right to “bear arms” is not a negotiable point. It allows for people to own firearms, for hunting, for personal defense and simple ownership. States may create varying state level control laws, but the rights of the Constitutional at the federal level cannot be infringed upon (ProCon Organization, 2016).
Strict Gun Laws Will Not Equate to Less Death: Opposition to stricter gun control laws argue that gun laws do not equate to less death. In fact, all that it guarantees is that people who conform with such laws will be unarmed, but that does not speak to those who break the law. If anything it will only lead to more death of those who are unprotected (ProCon Organization, 2016).
Guns Do Not Kill, People Do: This is, again, one of the oldest gun control arguments. Guns are inanimate objects; they have no power, they have no will and no control over how it is used. It is like a tool. However, once someone choose to turn that tool into a weapon it becomes dangerous. Hammers do not kill without someone to swing them, a firearm is no different (ProCon Organization, 2016).
Armed Civilians for Personal Protection: The opposition to strict gun laws argues that disarming the general public, who have committed no crimes, would be leaving these people defenseless, especially in their own home. Americans have the right to defend their families, their possessions and property. More importantly Americans have the right to save their own lives from those who would take it from them (ProCon Organization, 2016).
Guns and Suicide: The opposition to stricter gun control laws disagree that there is any significant correlation directly between gun access and suicide rates. People who option to end their own lives will find another way if a gun is not available; intentional drug overdose or jumping off a building for example (ProCon Organization, 2016).
Strict Gun Control Will Deter Crime: There all sorts of different types of crimes committed every day, both at the blue collar and white collar level, which have absolutely nothing to do with a weapon of any kind, including a gun. Again, if law-abiding citizens are disarmed, if anything, it would encourage gun crime because people are defenseless. Not knowing what citizens may or may not legally have a firearm is greater deterrent of crime (ProCon Organization, 2016).
Regardless of one’s opinion, personal ideologies, political differences and ethical arguments, it is what the research, years of study and dedicated research, have shown that will ultimately tip the scales one way or the other. There has been a great deal of research designed to answer the predominate question on this issue, will stricter gun control laws actually deter, lessen, or eliminate gun crime on a large national scale? Can they make cities safer? How does the research stand up to the current argument for and against? There have been many studies that favor both sides of the strict gun control argument. Again, all it proves, is that this is one of the most complex issue facing the American people. It is not simple and there are a lot of factors to consider at the ideological, ethical, legal and societal level.
Firstly, the debate regarding the Second Amendment and the Constitutional right to bear arms has been going on for decades. Sometimes the two sides are so antithetical in their views that finding any agreement can seem unlikely. However, as explained by Joseph Blocher in his 2013 article, "Firearm Localism," for the Yale Law Review, many studies are showing that Americans are often in agreement on certain types of legislature and reasonable gun control laws. It is clear that policy makers are seeing the difference between realistic gun control laws and those that are too restrictive as detailed by Natalie Wolchover, in her 2012 article, “Why Gun Control Is So Contentious in the U.S.,” for Scientific American. The reality is that many supporters of strict gun control do not support the right of the individual to protect themselves. They propose that once guns are strictly monitored and eliminated there will be no need for “self defense.” Unfortunately a number of studies have shown that with or without restrictive gun control measures they do not effect actual crime rates nor do they impact the statistics of homicides, as discussed in James M. LaValle’s article, "Gun Control vs. Self-Protection: A Case Against the Ideolgical Divide," in 2013, for the Justice Policy Journal.
In the article "A Criminologist's Case Against Gun Control," by Jacob Davidson, in 2015, for Time Magazine, the author explains that there are a lot of misconceptions regarding both sides of the argument. After the many instances of mass shootings and terrorist attacks the only way to aid in preventing that from happening is to eliminate the guns all together. This has been supported by research under the Obama Administration, detailed in the article, "Strict Gun Laws Questioned Whether They Make Cities Safer," by Ryan J. Foley, in 2015, for Police Once Magazine,” that determined that cities with the stricter gun laws had lower crime rates, less gun crime and less gun deaths. He continues to argue that the majority of gun death is not via crime, but via suicides. Representatives of the National Rifle Association, the preeminent supporter of American Second Amendment gun rights, argue that these studies are a bit misleading (Davidson, 2015). For example, most Americans who own firearms do not own the types of guns most often used by mass shooters and terrorist agents, handguns are most often owned by private citizens not semi-automatic rifles; therefore stricter gun laws on the public will impact such events very little. In the same vein, in states with restrictive gun laws may show a lower number suicide death due to gun use, but it did not necessarily affect the overall suicide rate, which has varied very little, explains Catherine Mortensen (Foley, 2015).
Very often in circumstances where a gun is involved in a crime the result could be lethal. In fact, according to Stephanie Pappas in her article for Live Science Magazine, titled "Do Gun Laws Really, Prevent Deaths? New Study Dissected," in 2013, when a gun is involved in the commission of a crime, even a first attempt, it is 84% more likely to be a lethal experience; this could be due to the offender’s confrontation with an armed homeowner or with law enforcement. There is also a misconception by many that no gun laws at all are the goal of those who support Second Amendment gun rights. The fact is that many states have gun control laws, which have had differing successes. It is a misconception that those opposed to increasing gun control laws are not opposed to all gun control measures. For some time now many in the opposition to gun control laws who have acknowledge the need for gun seekers to have a proper background checks and should be cleared of mental illness. They have also been open-minded regarding sanctioning differ type of weapons, while hunting rifles are justified for hunting and handguns are meant for protection, nobody really needs an assault rifle for personal use, as discussed in the article "Ban Guns, End Shootings? How Evidence Stacks Up Around the World," by John Donohue, for CNN News, in 2015.
There are many who wholeheartedly believe that stricter gun control laws will not deter crime or prevent crime, but will actually make it far worse (ProCon Organization, 2016). It will leave innocent and law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage. The best example of this would be a family asleep in their beds is invaded by offenders who have guns. The family has no weapon, therefore, are at the mercy of the invaders. If the homeowner had been armed, even if they did not fire the gun, it might have scared off the offenders. This is a realistic concern. However, the bulk of the research finds that in places where control laws are the strictest, the rate of gun related injuries and deaths has not really increased in any significant way as explained by David H. Bailey and Jonathan M. Borweln, in the article "Does Gun Control Encouragement Crime: The Science of Crime Statistics," in 2016, for The Huffington Post
While some cities and some states have had positive outcomes after implementing stricter gun laws and are satisfied that it would work the same in any other state. However, that simply is not always the case. In fact a fantastic example of just how inconsistent that the results of such studies are can be is found in the gun related deaths in the city of Chicago, Illinois. Chicago is one of the most dangerous cities in the United States and it literally has some of the highest gun violence statistics in the country. According to Kevin Boyd in a 2015 article, "The 'Most Dangerous' city in America Also Has Some of the Nation's Strictest Gun Laws," for the Independent Journal Review, more than 84% of homicides committed in Chicago are the result of gunshots. What makes this case so important is that Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the whole of the United States. Having heavy restriction on gun ownership does not directly lead to an absolute turn around in gun related deaths. Again, as mentioned, even the strictest of gun laws are only relevant to people who follow the laws, it does not have a huge impact on those who choose not to; if they want a gun and intend to commit a crime they will find a way regardless of the gun law policies enacted (ProCon Organization, 2016). That being said gun laws do not necessarily make a city, community or town any safer.
CONCLUSION
After reviewing the available research and studies it is obvious that gun control is a complex issue with no absolute or guaranteed solutions. The reality is that both sides of the argument asks valid questions and want very much the same things. No one wants people to use guns for criminal offenses, no one wants citizens to feel unsafe and no one wants guns getting into the wrong hands. The fact is that strict gun laws are not necessarily the “cure-all” that supporters might like and the inclusion of common sense restrictions are not an affront to the American Constitution. Proactive compromise is what looks to be the most common conclusion of much of the research and study. As to the major question, do strict gun control laws make a city safer? The answer is no. In fact, with or without gun laws, crime rates and gun violence still seems to continue and only through compromise and consensus will true effective changed will likely be achieved.
REFERENCES
Bailey, D.H. and Borweln, J.M. (2015). Does gun control encourage crime? The science of crime
statistics. The Huffington Post. 1. Retrieved January 29, 2017, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-h-bailey/does-gun-control-encourage-crime_b_7917684.html
Blocher, J. (2014). Firearm Localism. The Yale Law Journal. 123(1). 82-147
Boyd, K. (2015). The most dangerous' city in american also has some of the nation's strictest gun
laws. Independent Journal Review. 1. Retrieved January 29, 2017, from http://ijr.com/2014/09/178770-americans-asked-dangerous-city-winner-probably-isnt-surprise/
Davidson, J. (2015). A criminologist’s case against gun control. Time Magazine. 1. Retrieved
Donohue, J. (2015). Ban guns, end shootings? How evidence stacks up around the world. CNN
News. 1. Retrieved January 29, 2017, from http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/27/opinions/us-guns-evidence/
Foley, R.J. (2015). Strict gun laws questioned whether they make cities safer. Police One
Magazine. 1. Retrieved January 29, 2017, from https://www.policeone.com/patrol-issues/articles/29408006-Strict-gun-laws-questioned-whether-they-make-cities-safer/
LaValle, J.M. (2013). "Gun control" vs. "self-protection:" A case against the ideological divide.
Justice Policy Journal. 10(1). 1-26.
Pappas, S. (2013). Do gun laws really prevent deaths? New study dissected. Live Science
Magazine. 1. Retrieved January 29, 2017, from http://www.livescience.com/27740-gun-laws-deaths-study.html
Wolchover, N. (2012). Why gun control is so contentious in the US. Scientific American. 1.
Retrieved August 30, 2016, from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-gun-control-is-so-con/
ProCon Organization. (2016). Should more gun control laws be enacted? ProCon Organization.
1. Retrieved January 29, 2017, from http://gun-control.procon.org/
