Since time immemorial, the issue of Gun rights vs. Gun control has been a hotly debatable topic across the United States. The issue is divisive since it is faced with sensitive arguments between those advocating for gun rights and the supporters of gun control. The supporters of gun rights believe that the constitution guarantees the right to purchase a firearm as stated in the 2nd amendments. Contrariwise, the advocates of gun control believe that the private ownership of guns contributes to a high crime rate, and also, careless deaths occur as a result of gun rights. The debate becomes more emotional and hotter after deaths caused by guns are reported. The paper will offer a comprehensive analysis of the pros and cons of gun rights and gun control. Furthermore, the paper will support advocating for gun rights since the advantages of gun ownership outweighs the disadvantages.
In the recent times, the American public seems to adjust their tough stand regarding stricter gun control legislation (Spitzer 33). Despite the increasing rates on the number of mass shooting, American citizens are advocating for gun rights rather than gun control. The issue is very divisive to the American public and as it continue to cause heated debate in the entire political divide. Data from Roper Center illustrates the trends in public opinion concerning gun control and ownership. Most of the Democrats and people who don’t own a gun support the introduction of stricter gun control measures. On the other hand, a bigger percentage of the Republicans and gun owners favors the introduction of gun rights.
Notably, a majority of the population supports specific gun restrictions but still support gun rights. It has been found that universal background checks and locking out the mentally ill in gun ownership receive overwhelming support. The government has suggested the establishment of a federal database to monitor the sales of the gun across the country. It has also proposed a ban on people who assault the public using the dangerous machinery. Those gun control measures aim at ensuring that gun rights are never comprised, and citizens can enjoy their rights as enshrined in the constitution. The government measures contain multiple loopholes making gun control a problem in the United States.
In the contemporary world, gun control measures are effective since they have a positive impact in the society. For instance, the gun control measures ensure women are shielded from local abusers, intimate partners, and stalkers. In the United States alone, at least, five women are brutally murdered on a daily basis via guns. A woman's probability of dying is typically five more times if a firearm is used during a domestic quarrel. The Americans were the adversely affected victims in the recent Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Additionally, in such wars, women were murdered by an intimate partner. The victims of gun homicides contribute the highest percentage of women killed by firearms. Surprisingly, women who endured the hurdle of an attempted murder by an intimate partner were stalked in the year before the incidence took place. A majority of the countries do not blacklist convicted offensive stalkers from possessing firearms as well force condemned domestic abusers from renouncing guns they already have. Strict measures in gun control have warranted protection against women in the US.
Gun control measures are effective because they assist in lowering occasional gun deaths. Firearms are simply the highest source of deaths in both homicides and suicides. Though the effects of firearms are minor, they have surpassed those of the liver disease and demise from fires, drowning, and machinery accidents. The increase in the number of patients with gunshots wounds is evident of the alarming effects of firearms. For instance, the teens in America are more likely to succumb to death compared to other ones in other affluent economies. It is undoubted that legal possession of firearms tends to be linked with a long-term increased risk of violent death. Evidently, the legal procedures should be drafted well to allow tough punishments on criminals who execute innocent victims.
Effective measures associated with gun control are essential because they allow armed civilians to reduce or stop crimes. Furthermore, these measures will be beneficial to make dangerous situations including massacres more deadly. Gun control activists assert that in a situation where the armed civilians stop a dispute, the effects of the firearms are minimal. For example, if a dispute sprouts somewhere, the increasing number of guns creates a more hot-blooded and precarious situation. Moreover, it is evident that an average gun owner cannot control the life-threatening situation because he or she is not taught on how to handle these situations or enforce any laws. Furthermore, other mass shootings often classified as examples of armed citizens being able to prevent mass shootings encompassed law enforcement or military persons had stopped shooting before being restrained. It is important that the gun owner is educated on the importance of protecting one another from criminals.
Practicing gun control procedures in any region is essential because it helps to reduce the level of theft or burglary. Guns are a precious commodity and are highly demanded by the population who wants to own a firearm. The weakness of gun control policies has allowed gangsters to obtain guns via legal transactions to conduct their criminal activities. The laws passed concerning gun control will influence the way persons who already legally possess guns are likely to lease the weapons. Many people find it lucrative to offer guns to criminals, and these have increased the level of insecurities in both urban and rural areas. The legal persons should draft policies that infringe severe penalties on those persons who have leased the guns to others without the permission from the authority.
Contrariwise, there are numerous arguments against gun control. Those who supports gun rights believe it’s their constitutional mandate to own a gun. They claim that owning a gun helps them to protect their individual rights. Gun rights advocates want to acquire a firearm for self-protection and defense because the constitution allows it. In most instances, Gun rights have been said to be guaranteed by the 2nd amendment of the American constitution. The 2nd amendment states that “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” (Crane 285). The supporters of gun rights assert that an individual has a right to possess a gun while the proponents argue that it’s a collective right of the citizen, allowed through a militia. For a long period, the Supreme Court stayed away from interpreting the clause and mostly favored a collected stand. In 2008, the Supreme Court announced that people had a constitution right to acquire firearms as illustrated in the 2nd amendment. Despite this ruling, there still exists raging debates regarding the restrictions enshrined in the constitution.
The Federal data on domestic manufacturers on import and imports indicates an upward trend in gun ownership (Cook, Philip, and Kristin 7). From 2003 to 2011, the shipment of firearms increased in the domestic market. It is clear that most citizens support gun rights, and they have gone ahead to purchase a firearm without hesitation. It is even said that the manufacturers and dealers of guns are failing to meet the rising demands of the society. The Congress has also adjusted its stance on gun control, and it has gone a step further in amending legislation to soften the stricter gun control measures to allow the citizens to enjoy their gun rights. Although the issue of gun rights vs. gun control is highly divisive, there are many areas when the citizens agree with each other concerning the gun policies.
I believe that gun rights lead to peaceful coexistence in the society. Owning firearms helps members of the society to increase their defensive powers. Criminals are also afraid of raiding the society since people will fight back any illegal attacks that seem to victimize them. When the citizens are armed, they will assist the law enforcement officers in fighting crime. It is difficult for a mass shooting to occur when civilians have their guns. Self-defense is fundamental, and it deters the occurrence of crime within the society (Cook, Philip, and Kristin 16). Although statistics shows that firearms have resulted in massive civilians deaths, prohibiting gun ownership is not a solution.
Instead, the government should pay attention to formulating regulations that will minimize the misuse of firearms by the public. The establishment of gun purchase restrictions will improve the situation where firearms are mishandled by owners. It is political to disarm the public without formulating policies to solve the loopholes over gun ownership. In contrast, people who believe in gun control claims that the society will be at a high risk of lethal incidences when people are allowed to have firearms.
People should stop fearing that gun ownership results to increase in crime rates. Even though there is a high rate of armed criminals, armed civilians have helped in foiling such attacks. It has been found that criminals will flee after they realize that homeowners have guns during an invasion. Most of the homeowners that have defended themselves during a gunfight with criminals have an 85% recovery rate. Moreover, criminals who sustains an injury during a crime are admitted to the hospital awaiting for imprisonment. The use of guns in self-defense during attacks is efficacious because civilians can protect their property as well as protect themselves from attaining serious injuries.
The founding fathers of our nation included the 2nd amendment because they believed that private ownership of firearms would help us to protect our liberties (Agger, Ben, and Timothy 203). Therefore, the notion that guns are not safe should be avoided at all costs. Establishing gun control laws punish the sincere and honest citizens. Even if the government bans the ownership of guns, the hardcore criminals will still own dangerous firearms. Denying citizens the opportunity to shield themselves from extortion and harassment from criminals would put their lives in jeopardy.
Since the police force has proved ineffective in fighting crime, it is high time to allow citizens to own guns so that they can defend the society from wrongdoing. The law enforcement authorities should understand that guns don’t kill people; people do. They should, therefore, concentrate on injecting good values and morals to the people. When the public is enlightened about the need to stay calm and observe moral values, the cases of deaths associated with guns will decrease. The media should be warned against lionizing violence and respect the law. The media must be in the frontline of spreading peace messages rather than create political instability and tension within the society. As a result, gun ownership will not be associated with challenges announced in the past.
There is a lot of misleading and unnecessary information circulating in the public regarding gun ownership. The notion that guns contribute to a high suicide rate should be eliminated. The advocates for gun control rights are made to believe that guns lead to high suicide rates. It should be put clear that private ownership of firearms does not increase the rates of suicide and the gun control laws are not in a position to lower suicide rates. Despite Lithuania being the country with the lowest gun ownership across the world, it has been said to have the highest suicide rate among 71 states. Another example is Japan, who experiences 18.41 deaths per 100,000 people, and this ranks them in position 11 in the 71 countries (ProCon.Org). Japan is also among the countries that have a low percentage of gun owners. Despite the United States having the highest rate of private gun owners, it is ranked position 26th on the list.
I support gun rights since the perceptions of most Americans are changing with time. For example, in 1999, most civilians supported gun ownership for hunting purposes rather than self-defense. By 2013, statistics indicated that 48% supported gun rights because they believed it increased protection compared to 32% that gave hunting reasons (PewResearchCenter). Most citizens currently enjoy having a gun as they are not worried about spontaneous criminal attacks. The rights of individuals to own guns should not be infringed by any means. Instead, civilians should be empowered to acquire the firearms and practice their gun rights. The government should be concerned about controlling the incidences of illegal actions that results from gun ownership in the United States. The elucidation above states clearly that gun rights should be allowed and the citizens must be subjected to the rule of law. Individuals who take advantage of the ownership of the firearms must be answerable to the law and harsh penalties should face the perpetrators. It is also important for the government and other stakeholders to participate in public campaigns to enlighten people about the use of guns within the society.
Work cited
Agger, Ben, and Timothy W. Luke. Gun Violence and Public Life. Routledge, 2015.
Cook, Philip J., and Kristin A. Goss. The Gun Debate: What Everyone Needs to KnowRG. Oxford University Press, 2014.
Crane, Michael. The Political Junkie Handbook. SP Books, 2004.
Spitzer, Robert. Guns Across America: Reconciling Gun Rules and Rights. Oxford University Press, 2015.
PewResearchCenter. "Why Own a Gun? Protection Is Now Top Reason | Pew Research Center." Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. N.p., 12 Mar. 2013. Web. 4 Mar. 2016.
ProCon.Org. "THE LEADING SOURCE FOR PROS & CONS OF CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES." Gun Control - ProCon.org. N.p., 26 Feb. 2016. Web. 4 Mar. 2016.
