Today, the mention of crime in the inner cities immediately whips up emotions regarding unlawful possession of guns by criminal gangs. There are many reports on violence that result from the use of unregistered guns over the past decades.The crime rate in inner cities goes interchangeably with unlawful possession of guns. When the government put laws that seek to control ownership of guns, do the steps help to stop crime and protect citizens? Robert La Follette argues that the issue of gun control should not focus on whether to support ownership or to oppose ownership, rather, decisions should be made on which person should own a firearm, the type of guns they can own, and under what circumstances they should own guns. This essay discusses the issue of gun control and reviews the justifications and oppositions of gun control.
Guns are powerful weapons that can cause harm, destruction and even death. They can be used to defend oneself, protect oneself or threaten to kill other persons. Whatever the view of gun use, they are powerful weapons both socially and physically. Gun control issues can be so controversial, and thus the direction the law on gun control takes should be evaluated diligently. The use of guns greatly affects families and the nation at large.
In our nation, almost half of all households own a minimum of one gun. According to the USA Gun Violence Statistics, each year, it is reported that almost 30,000 citizens die from gunshots and related crimes. This fact alone shows that ownership of guns causes harm to the lives of citizens. Consequently, gun control is a very crucial issue. However, the number of incidents that are related to gun use have greatly decreased over the years. In the early 1990s, there was a huge number of people who were reported dead or wounded as a result of improper gun use (USA Gun Violence Statistics, 2017). However, subsequent years after 1993, the US experienced a steady decline in deaths that result from firearms (Webster 31). Fatal accidents that result due to the use of guns has declined by 34% and deaths by 56% in the last decade. The United States Gun Violence Statistics indicate that there are currently 283 million guns in use in the United States (USA Gun Violence Statistics, 2017). This means that acquiring and using guns for whatever reasons is easy.
This decline in both deaths and accidents from gun use can be attributed to gun control laws and decreasing unemployment rates as well as providing other social factors.
Should the legislation be too tight? Maybe not. Most people have a mindset that the sole purpose of guns is to kill. What happens when an evil person breaks into an innocent man’s house with whatever motive, when they point a gun at them or any member of the family, the person will be willing to do even the impossible for the sake of his/her security and that of the family. If the person wants to kill he could easily do that and one may not be able to fight back. Allowing ownership of guns can thus be critical for the protection of family and in self-defense (Webster 41).
However, there should be strategies to be followed to allow ownership of guns. If psychopaths are allowed to own guns, they are more likely to cause more harm as they might not use the guns for the right purposes. There was an incident during Boston Marathon where two men hurled off a bomb at the finishing line, which killed three people and injured hundreds of people. This incident shows that gun control should not be so strict as people who want to kill can use other tools. Rates of murder in Russia as of the year 2002 was four times higher than the US despite the fact that Russia had banned the use of handguns (Lindsey 394).
There are no empirical studies that show strict gun control can reduce murder, suicide, violent crimes or accidents. Research shows that the people who would use guns to cause scenes have always been violent throughout their lives. They are the ones that rape, rob and kill among other evils deeds in the society (Webster & Daniel 32). For this reason, allowing good and law-abiding citizens to own guns will not by any chance increase the bad incidents of gun use. Empirical evidence shows that most people who are reported to use guns cause violence or commit crime have a broken life to put it in simpler terms. The government can help improve the social life of the citizens who will thus find no time to use guns to do evil (Lindsey 392).
The case of unemployment, for instance, makes people idle and desperate because they have nothing to do and worse still they do not have money to cater for their needs. The easiest way for most of these people is to rob since begging may not always work. How would one coax someone to forcefully give them money or any other treasures? The easiest way is to use guns. Further, unemployment in most cases makes people indulge in drug use. All drug related crimes mostly involve the use of guns. According to Lindsey, once the government works to ensure that all people or a higher percentage of its citizens have employment then, a large number of people who would use guns to commit a crime as a means to survive would reduce. A reduction in the number of gun and crime related uses consequently reduces incidences of gun related crimes.
Reported cases of homicides, domestic violence, and suicide that involve the use of guns have increased over the years. Most Americans argue that ownership of guns is the cause of such incidences. However, Webster holds the view that the decisions made to use the guns are the last resort taken by the victims. The governments can thus help each state to devise ways that they can use to manage composure of its citizens. There are social factors such us anger, splintering gangs, depression, guilt, joblessness, drug use and many other petty issues that have an association with gun-related crimes.
The recent Orlando shootings, the Chicago shootings, and the Colorado shootings led to the loss of many lives. Many innocent people who would have been participating in nation building perished. Besides, controlling crime scenes and taking convicted people to prison does not guarantee that such shootings will not happen again in the future. The cracks of the matter are, gun-related crimes can happen again and again and more people will die due to the same. Gum-crimes in Chicago, for instance, are way higher and cannot be compared with those in New York. This is more or less like saying states that have economically stable residents have fewer problems hence fewer crimes. The government’s action to control guns may be futile in controlling crime as the acquisition of the guns happens in the black market. The best thing that the government and interest groups need to do is find a way of reaching to the smallest groups in states and find out the problems they are experiencing and work together to correct the problems and make the inner cities safer for human habitation (Webster 40).
In conclusion, the government has a duty to control gun possession in the country. For gun control, the government does not necessarily need to outlaw or take guns away from people who own them legally; rather it should control the types of guns owned and scrutinize the profiles of the people who apply for guns. The government, for instance, does not allow the use of war zone guns like M16 by the general public. The government needs to examine persons before authorizatio of guns. Also, they need to control the types of guns that each person can be given. The guns used in the country also need to be registered. All these steps are not enough. What’s more is that the government should help citizens to fight the problems and resolve inequality and unemployment as a long term measure.
References
Lindsey, Ronald W. "Debate: Gun Control in the United States." Clinical orthopedics and related research 471.12 (2013): 3934.
USA Gun Violence Statistics. Gun Violence in the United States. USA Gun Violence Statistics, 2017. Retrieved from http://heedinggodscall.org/content/pfctoolkit-10
Webster, Daniel W., et al. "Effects of Baltimore’s Safe Streets Program on gun violence: A replication of Chicago’s CeaseFire Program." Journal of Urban Health 90.1 (2013): 27-40.
