Introduction
Gun control debate has attracted heated debate on whether the use of gun should be controlled or should not in the United States. Different political sides have assumed hardline stands on the issue. This is evident from the proponents for gun legislation control and the opponents for the control of gun use. President Barack Obama has made his intentions clear on gun control in congress. This was exclusively after the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting. Obama confirmed his proposal on the need of congress to pass the legislations that will check the ownership and usage of guns. The legislation should guarantee that it implements protocol checks on banning the ownership of assault weapons, armor-piercing bullets and high capacity ammunition. Moreover, congress should increase budgetary allotment for more recruiting of law enforcing agents in streets to curb the menace.
Cole, Smith, Christopher & DeJong, (2012), endorse that the Obama administration is keen on pushing for gun control policies fundamentally for several reasons. The reasons are to guarantee public safety and subsequently for public interest. The authors affirm that for the success of the gun control legislation the Obama administration depends heavily on the congress to enact the decree. The enactment will limit gun violence apparent in the United States. The declaration based on the social organization theory, it is obvious that different societal organizational structures have increased levels of crimes predominantly because of breakdown on the social control and criminal cultures flourishing in the societies. The authors in the presentation on the proponent call by the Obama administration on gun control it also notable that the proclaiming by the government has attracted opposing forces. Cole, Smith, Christopher & DeJong, (2012), assert that the National Rifle Association (NRA) is up in arms condemning the assertions by the Obama Administration. The association states that gun control legislation will be an abuse by the government on the rights of Americans to own private property. The federal constitution of the United States upholds the right of American citizens to own property. Any activity to challenge any acquisition of property or asset is outlawed.
Contrary to the assertions presented by Cole, Smith, Christopher & DeJong, (2012), another intellect Kopel, (1995), concludes that gun control in the United States has to be deliberated based on two critical notions. Kopel suggests that the debate has to be based on the legal and criminology aspects. On the contextual basis, enactments have been enacted to control the usage and abuse of guns. Nonetheless, the decisive question, which lingers is what happens to the innocent Americans who use guns for self-defense. Enactment of Obama proposal will merely means that Americans are denied an opportunity to protect themselves. On the other hand of criminology, what happens to cases of those who abuse their right to own guns through committing crimes? Both issues attract contention which requires sober and critical arguments before concluding the course of action to be taken by the congress. Despite the federal constitution affirming the right of Americans to own guns, it is noticeable that the ownership has to be checked to surety the safety of innocent Americans who are victims of the same legislation. The authors conclude that any freedom and right of the person seizes to be a right if it manipulates of affects the right of another person. This simply means that the right to own guns seizes to be a right when it is utilized to incur injury and death to other people.
In an article written by Mason and Roberta, (2013), titled “Obama Turns to Police Officers in Gun Control Fight” it is obvious that gun control policy is an advantage for Americans. This is simply in connection with the recent killing where innocent children and teachers where executed by a mentally distressed person. Gun control policy will ensure that purchase of assault weapons by Americans is eliminated. This will play a boundless role in taming occurrences such as the mass killing of American children. For the success of gun control in terms of usage and acquisition, the law enforcement unit has to be fully trained. This is through training law enforcement officers to be well versed in handling situations that arise from abuse of gun ownership by American citizens. Moreover, the law enforcers should be equipped effectively to handle the situation efficiently. To realize gun control advantages, the congress has to enact the relevant policy to address the issue. The enactment will make sure the public is allowed to own specified guns, which are solely for self-defense. Moreover, before an individual is allowed to own a gun an expansive family background check should be initiated to assess them. The assessing will be both psychological and socially to determine the track record of gun violence in their family.
Gun control policies in the United States will have obvious significances. For example, banning ownership of guns will surety that cases of rampant gun violence confrontations are limited. A compelling case is the shooting of twenty children by an American who had access to a gun. Second, it is apparent that accidental killings that are reported in homes, schools and streets because of gun ownership will be checked. This is merely because people will have limited access to guns. Moreover, rates of crimes will be on the check. This is purely because guns act as tools for committing crimes in the cases contrary to people using them for self-defense. Nevertheless, the article by National Youth Journal titled “Why Gun Control Can't Eliminate Gun Violence” concludes that controlling the ownership of guns in the United States will play an extremely limited role in reducing rates of gun violence. This is simply because interested parties will effortlessly access guns in black markets and other illegal gun outlets. To guarantee that there is gun control, it is essential for law enforcers to get rid of the illegals gun market outlets that sell guns to Americans irrespective of their mental stability and track record on use of weapons.
Nell, (2012), converses his support for the gun control program. The enactment proposed by the Obama administration is an effective masterpiece, which will play a principal role in tackling the issue of gun violence. The proposition by Obama explicitly deals with addressing the issue of gun ownership and access of guns by Americans. This is palpable from the assertion of ensuring people own identified types of guns whereas other guns are banned from public reach, recruiting of more law enforcers to address the issue of gun control and checking of family background on a person before being allowed to own a gun. This is to certify that individuals with unstable violent background or have cases of gun violence are black listed from gun ownership. However, it is noteworthy that the policy fails to address the issue of mass killing by gun owners. Apparent and obvious cases include random shooting in a movie theater killing twelve people and injuring about fifty nine people. The author confirms that for an effectiveness of the enactment the Obama administration has to ensure that it strengthens the policy to cover mas killing that are apparent from the gun ownership.
The rates of murders and gun ownership are exceptionally high in the United States. This is accentuated to the article “Evaluating Gun Policy: Effects on Crime and Violence,” by Ludwig and Cook, (2003). The authors argue that rates of gun ownership are sky high in comparison to the shootings. They also denote that the comparison simply does not mean that the numbers of murders are accredited to gun ownership in the United States. Nonetheless, it is obligatory to come to terms that guns play a tremendous role in murders. Guns are attributed to be among the top leading cause of murders committed in the United States. The murders are both from criminals and people using guns, accidental murders using guns and revengeful and purposeful murders by means of guns. This highlights the high rates of murders resulting from gun ownership. A curb on gun ownership may not directly reduce the shooting but may play a fundamental role to put a check on murders reported annually. The author concluded that a declaration of self-defense as a pivotal reason to kill others should not qualify as a reason worth to deter the Obama administration on controlling gun ownership in the United States.
Elliot Marshal completes that guns are chiefly weapons of violence. This is merely because of instances reported on people using guns to commit crimes. Ownership of a gun may be a motivational factor for a person to commit crimes primarily because of its ability to facilitate a crime. The report by Marshal is a true presentation of the White House position on the issue of guns. The White House has made it clear that gun ownership in the United States has to be checked exclusively to eliminate it as a tool of violence. Gun control policy being proposed by the government is merely to ensure that safety of both the Americans in possession of guns and those not in possessions is guaranteed. It is obvious that an increase in gun related crime incidents will play a crucial role in encouraging more Americans to acquire guns. This is in order to protect their families and themselves when need arises. The existence of places where Americans can acquire guns legally and illegal play a great role on the need of the government to ensure that the congress enacts the laws. A failure of the enactment will simply means that the extreme cases of gun violence in the United States will continue to be a habitual occurrence.
Reis and Vasilogambros confirm that the president has played a respectable role in fashioning the policy on gun control in the United States. The policy presented by the Obama administration will make certain that communities in the United States are safe and secure from gun violence as reported in the past. However, the job turns to the congress. The congress has the responsibility to ensure that the course of the president to secure the safety of Americans is concluded. This is through making changes on the presented enactment by the White House to certify that any loopholes on the enactment are sealed. Sealing loopholes will pledge that gun offenses attributed to the presence and ownership of guns by American citizens are eliminated. A failure by the congress to support the presentation by the government would be rather careless on the safety of the Americans who mandated them to enact relevant legislations for their security. The author concludes by affirming that the need of the public to be involved in the process is critical since the legislation will address their security issues. Suggestions from the public should be accommodated on the legislation to guarantee it is comprehensive.
Guns have diverse negative impacts both on the family and societal level. Spitzer, (2009), affirms that guns play a fundamental role in molding of crimes both in the family and societal level. On the family level cases of accidental gun shots have occasioned weakened and broken families. Besides, trust issues have ensued in family simply because of gun presence in family houses. This has also been the case in the societal level. Easy access of guns in the society has ensued to increased criminal rates. Guns act as weapons which facilitate crimes by criminals. This is in turn has affected the social economic structure of the society. In order to address the issue, the author avows that regulation has to be factored into gun ownership in the United States. The proposed enactment by the Obama administration will play a pivotal role of guaranteeing that there are checks and balances on the ownership of guns. Likewise, limiting the specified types of guns available to the people will guarantee that guns available are chiefly for self-defense. The right to allow ownership of a gun irrespective of the types has led to people to own sophisticated guns that are of great destruction.
The assertions declared by Spitzer, (2009), are supported by Webster, and Vernick, (2013), who uphold that to reduce gun violence the society has to be subjected to regulations on the issue. Based on the senseless shooting in Sandy Hook elementary school, the author acknowledges that gun policies have to be factored into the constitution of the United States. The deaths which are attributed to guns in the United States are affirmed to be about thirty three persons per year. This is exceptional high ion consideration that the country has no laws regulating the ownership and access of guns. The federal constitution allows citizens of United States to own guns but does not consider taming the usage and access. This has resulted to massive killing of people by disturbed and unstable persons in possession of guns. This simply means that the government has to proposes enactment which should enacted by the Congress into laws to regulate gun ownership, usage and access. The Obama administration has been dedicated in ensuring that legislations are enacted on guns to control the evident mass shooting that have been on the rise in the United States.
Conclusion
Gun control has been an issue of disputation. The Obama administration has unmistakably indicated the prerequisite of regulating the ownership, usage and access of guns. This is essentially because of increasing crimes rates and mass shooting of innocent Americans. Several authors have contributed to the debate by conferring diverse reasons on the need to check on gun control. The diverse reasons presented by the intellect include reduced cases of crimes in the societies, elimination of accidental gun shooting that lead to deaths and securing of the public safety. The scholars have additionally avowed that for the secured and safe American society gun control policies should be enacted by the congress. All the same, the National Rifle Association has aired its dismay on the need to regulate gun usage and ownership in the United States. This is attributed to the fact that the regulation will be abusing the rights of Americans to own property.
References
Cole, G. F., Smith, C. E., & DeJong, C. (2012). The American System of Criminal Justice. California: Cengage Learning.
Eliot, M. (16 January 2013). "Obama Lifts Ban on Funding Gun Violence Research" Science Insider (American Association for the Advancement of Science). Retrieved 2013-02-05
Kopel, D. B. (1995). The Ideology of Gun Ownership and Gun Control in the U.S. Quarterly
Ludwig, J., & Cook, P. J. (2003). Evaluating Gun Policy: Effects on Crime and Violence. The
Washington: Brookings Institute.
Mason, J., & Rampton, R. (2013). “Obama turns to police officers in gun control fight”.
Reuters.com. Web. February 26, 2013.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/28/us-obama-guns-idUSBRE90Q0BA20130128.
National Youth Journal “Why Gun Control Can't Eliminate Gun Violence”. Web.
Retrieved on October 24, 2013, from
http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/why-gun-control-can-t-eliminate-gun-violence-20130918.
Nell, M. (2012). “First Suits Filed re Shooting Spree During Batman Movie Blame Colo. Theater for Lax Security”. Aba Journal.com. Web. October 24, 2013, Retrieved from, http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/first_suits_filed_re_shooting_spree_during_bat man_movie_blame_colo._theater/
Reis, P. and Vasilogambros, M. (2013). Gun Control Failed in Congress. It’s Happening
Anyway. National Journal.com. Web. October 24, 2013. Retrieved from
http://www.nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/gun-control-failed-in-congress-it-s- happening-anyway-20130917.
Spitzer, R. J. (2009). Gun Control: A Documentary and Reference Guide. Westport CT:
Greenwood Press.
Webster, D., & Vernick, J. S. (2013). Reducing Gun Violence in America: Informing Policy
With Evidence and Analysis. Maryland: John Hopkins University.
