Gun Control in the US-Why Gun Control is not Good, and Citizens should be Allowed to Possess
Institution
Name
Author Note
Why Gun Control is not Good, and Citizens should be Allowed to Possess
Introduction
For several years now, there have developed debated arguments regarding gun control laws in the United States from which an amicable agreement has not yet been reached. These debates have divided the country into two (Carter, 2020), with those in support of gun laws and those who are not. In 2008, the US Supreme Court, under the landmark case of District of Columbia v. Heller, ruled that the right to bear guns was not limited to any law and that the District of Columbia’s handgun ban and its requirement of riffles to be unloaded and disassembled violated the Second Amendment policy. The court also, according to Carter (2020), stated that guns and gun ownership would continue to be regulated and that citizens would bear arms for lawful purposes such as self-defense at home. After this ruling, constant debates hit the air and became controversial among the US citizens and states as well. Proponents of gun control laws argued that they feared for their safety, claiming that there was an approximate of 88 guns owned per every 100 people (Badanes, 2019). They also put across facts that around 114, 994 US citizens succumb to gunshots every year due to cases of murders, accidents, police interventions, or suicides (Miller & Hemenway, 2008).
On the other hand, Carter (2020) observes that some individuals against the laws argue that possession of guns ensures personal safety and protection. At the same time, they feel that gun restriction would leave citizens unable to protect themselves in worst-case scenarios that provoke their safety (Carter, 2020). More so, they base their arguments on the protection rights spelled by the Second Amendment, which “protects individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with militia service, and to use the arm for traditionally lawful purposes like self-defense within the home.” Despite the restrictive measure of allowing individuals to own firearms, some states are still hesitant to allow such laws. For instance, states like New York, Maryland, California, and New Jersey, among others, still establish strict laws against firearm possession. Also, a disparity in views regarding these laws exists between the democrats and the republicans. Thesis Statement: gun control is not good, and therefore law-abiding citizens should be allowed to possess them for protection and safety.
Reasons for and Against Gun Control
For decades now, debates based on restrictive and unrestrictive gun laws are still prevalent in the US currently. With the Second Amendment to the US Constitution in support of individual ownership of firearms, proponents of unrestrictive gun laws have always won the day’s motion since (Carter, 2020). Some of the arguments put across by these individuals include self-protection, safety, it is legalized as per the constitution, and that it keeps away law-breakers from the society (ProCon Organization, 2019). Firstly, guns are used for self-defense and safety of persons in cases of extreme danger, which may claim one’s life. For instance, in cases of robbery and theft, possession of a gun would scare away burglars and prevent any harm that may have befallen, the public had the theft occurred. In this light, Carter (2020) indicates that there would be cases of less criminal activities since criminals are afraid of armed citizens more than they fear the police. Additionally, these individuals argue that it is evident that when firearms are used for self-defense, there is a 98% chance that no shots will be fired (Carter, 2020). For instance, in the case of the Oregon scandal, where a 26-year old Nick Meli surpassed a gun shooting that claimed the lives of two people and the murderer who shot himself after he noticed Meli had a gun. The interception assisted in preventing more mass murders, which was possible without the law-abiding citizen Meli having to fire his gun. Had Meli not showed up, many innocent lives would have been lost that night; therefore, possession of firearms is an essential tool that ensures both personal and public safety. Also, if gun possession were banned on citizens, it would mean that only criminals had access to them thus (Miller & Hemenway, 2008), leaving the lives of the citizens at the mercy of these same delinquents.
Secondly, proponents claim that it is a constitutional requirement and a right for citizens to own firearms. According to the Second Amendment of the US Constitution of 1791, possession of firearms was legalized for all citizens for purposes of self-defense at home. Also, Ausman & Faria(2019) states that in several rulings of the US Supreme Court, judges have tried to contain this law and abolish the restrictive measures adopted by several states against gun possession. For instance, in the landmark case of the District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court ruled that citizens were allowed to own firearms for domestic purposes of protection (Carter, 2020). However, this was the first case, and maybe the last that the court ever supported the Second Amendment policy on firearm ownership.
Additionally, individuals in support of this law indicate that restricting ownership of guns will not restrict criminals from getting them. Ideally, however, many strict laws are implemented on access to guns; criminals will never miss possessing them (Ausman & Faria, 2019). Therefore, these proponents claim that gun-control laws do not keep guns from criminals; instead, they keep them from law-abiding, reasonable, and mentally stable citizens who know how to use them. At the same time, Walls (2019) indicates that guns are not entirely the problem; however, the problem lies with the people in possession of those guns. Most Americans are law-abiding and are fully aware of exposures that may prompt gun use, while others, a few percentages rather, use for the wrong purpose both knowingly and unknowingly (Walls, 2019). For instance, in the case of the Sandy Hook Elementary School Attack in 2012 at Connecticut, the perpetrator, a 20-year-old Adam Lanza, killed 26 people, including school children, teachers, his mother, and later murdered himself. A statement from the Connecticut state attorney revealed that Lanza had acted alone. However, Ausman & Faria (2019) note that a report from the Office of the Child Advocate indicated that Lanza was a victim of Asperger syndrome, which had severely deteriorated his mental health and preoccupied him with violence. From another case, the Oregon scandal, the murderer killed innocent civilians willingly and was not associated with any illness that could have prompted his actions (Ausman & Faria, 2019). Therefore, it is worth noting that gun ownership depends on the type of the person, and ideally, the problem lies with people essentially, not the guns.
On the other hand, ProCon Organization (2019) indicates that opponents of unrestrictive gun laws equate these laws as causes for mass murders and the increased death rates. For instance, the Orlando mass shooting in Florida in a gay night club was a clear depiction of the need for restrictive gun laws. The 29-year-old security guard, Omar Mateen, murdered 49 civilians and injured 53 others (Miller & Hemenway, 2008). The FBI deemed the incident as a terrorist attack based on a statement by Mateen that he had made n allegiance with the Islamic State leader in Iraq. Additionally, Badanes (2019) argues that possession of guns by unrestricted Americans puts the safety of the people in jeopardy. Also, they claim that these laws have contributed to the increased crime rates in various states (Badanes, 2019). Gun control advocates also indicate that the Supreme Court states that the Second Amendment is not an unlimited right to own a gun. Additionally, ProCon Organization (2019) puts out that gun control laws would help safeguard women and children from abusive domestic partners. Research indicates that five women are murdered every day in the United States; therefore, strict gun policies would curb such murders (ProCon Organization, 2019). More so, Badanes (2019) indicates that gun laws would help reduce societal costs based on gun violence. According to a study by the American Journal of Health, more than 100,000 victims of gunshots in the US generate an emergency room bill of close to 3 billion dollars per year. The study also indicates that Medicaid and Medicare costs rise to 2.7 billion dollars as a result of treating gunshot injuries (ProCon Organization, 2019). Therefore, the essentialness of gun laws will ensure public safety and reduce these related costs.
Conclusion
From my point of view, I like guns, and I do not support gun control. America is a free country, and we are free citizens as well, so we should be allowed to possess guns for our protection. Also, possession o guns would scare away criminals, thereby curbing the rate of crimes in the country. It is also essential to observe the constitution and the statutes put in place as its main aim is to safeguard the interests of its citizens, which among them is their safety. Additionally, gun control would not regulate the criminals from possessing them; instead, they compromise the safety of the citizens. Additionally, people in possession of firearms are reasonable and law-abiding; therefore, they know how and when to use them. In light of this, I would say, there are more lives saved when there are unrestrictive measures than when firearm control is exercised.
References
Ausman, J. I., & Faria, M. A. (2019). Is gun control really about people’s control?. Surgical neurology international, 10.
Badanes, S. (2019). The Gun Violence Epidemic Is Getting Worse, And We Need To Talk About It. Planned Parenthood Organization. New York, NY. Retrieved From https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/blog/the-gun-violence-epidemic-is-getting-worse-and we-need-to-talk-about-it
Carter, M. (2020). The Positive Impacts of Law-Abiding Citizens Owning Firearms. Ammo.com, Harvey, LA. Retrieved From https://ammo.com/articles/gun-ownership-in-america.
Miller, M., & Hemenway, D. (2008). Guns and Suicide in the United States. New England
Journal of Medicine, Waltham, MA. Retrieved From
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0805923
ProCon Organization, (2019). Should More Gun Laws Be Enacted? ProCon Organization, Santa Monica, CA. Retrieved From https://gun-control.procon.org/.
Walls, M., (2019). Guns Are Not The Problem, People Are. Capital Gazette , Annapolis, MD. Retrieved From
https://www.capitalgazette.com/opinion/columns/ac-ce-column-walls-20190629-story.html