Gun Control Bad

Gun Control: And The Arguments On The Subject Have you ever shot a gun if so you have probably felt adrenaline. So when most hunters think of guns they think of fun and their lives would be changed. Gun control has been a battle back and forth between different views for years around the world. In this subject for every argument there is a counterargument. But since the gun control we have now is cutting down on shootings but not limiting hunters or anybody who uses firearms legally most people think that we should keep the same laws.

Proponents of more gun control laws believe that the Second Amendment was intended exclusively for militias, that gun restrictions have always existed, and that gun regulations would prevent criminals from possessing firearms. However, Opponents claim that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to own guns, that guns are needed for self-defense, and that gun ownership helps to dissuade crime. Because of this obvious difference, proponents of stricter firearm regulation demand more laws to help prevent mass shooting, and want reform in the area of background checks. Meanwhile, opponents of gun laws often accuse the proponents of manipulating a mass tragedy in order to further strengthen their fight. Gun ownership has been a tradition within the united states since before the country itself was formed.

Every time a shooting happens. It feels like we have the same conversations. We ask the same questions. The debate never changes. We have a script for things like this and everyone has a general idea of what people will say.

The directions gun control may take not only affect our nation and society but the future. Guns play a role in everyone’s lives to some degree, whether it be your own personal possession for hunting or home protection. Many consider a militia to be "necessary to the security of a free state" ("The Constitution of the United States," Amendment 2). Americans value the rights that freedom granted by the forefathers, which includes the

Gun Control Policies The gun control or (firearms regulation) is a set of policies that regulate the modification, sale, manufacture, possession, transfer, or even the use of firearms by people. This policy was intended to limit the possession of a handgun to those who complete a background check and are cleared, and to those who have no mental illnesses. This would attempt to make sure that handguns do not end up in the hands of the wrong people, such as criminal, or those that have been convicted prior to these policies of gun abuse. With these policies in place it hopefully would cut down on gun violence.

Are guns really the problem? That is the question that comes to some people 's minds when someone thinks of gun control. If someone is being rude to someone else and they person being offended decides to blame the “offensive” clothes and not the rude comments. They decide to blame the problems on the clothes that the person is wearing. Then, is it really the clothes or the rude comments.

In 1998 the FBI issued the first background check for the purchase of a handgun. Even the briefest of background checks can keep guns out of the hands of convicted felons. More extensive background checks can look into medical records and stop people with extreme personality disorders from getting guns. People with bipolar disorder can suffer from manic highs followed by suicidal lows and if you pair that combination with the possession of a firearm the result will more then likely be catastrophic.

The ethical predicament has roots in societal views of violence and how it is observed by both sides of the debate. History of the Debate Gun control in the United States refers to any action taken by the federal, state, or local governments to regulate through legislation, the sale, purchase, safety, and use of firearms by individuals. Many high profile shootings, such as the 1999 shooting

Roger McGrath and Warren Burger provide different perspectives on the continuing debate over gun regulation in the United States. Although these authors establish opposing conclusions, both understand that gun related crimes are becoming increasingly common and therefore pose a threat to the domestic tranquility of the nation. Their controversy is centered around whether or not increased gun restrictions will lower criminal activity. McGrath, in his article “A God-Given Natural Right”, argues that increased gun control will only disarm law abiding citizens leaving them defenseless therefore providing incentives for criminals to break the law. However, Burger’s emphasis on the unrestricted distribution of firearms in his article “The Right to

Responsible gun owners know how to treat a gun when they buy it, that’s why we have developed an organization to separate these people from irresponsible people who choose to act by a distinct set of the ruling. (Sola, par. 3) This means that some people will have guns, but only the ones who choose to use them for necessary causes. This suggests that people who don’t want their guns to be taken away or banned, will possibly be able to keep them if they show responsibility, and if they don’t, then they will get punished by losing their guns.

Strict regulations and limitations have been pursued already and clearly do not suffice. Statics brought to attention by gun control opponents, show that gun control laws have done little to reduce crime rates. Several restrictions have been made on certain guns, considered as overly dangerous, though in the hands of an unstable criminal even a legal hunting gun can be deadly. Countless restrictions have been made, however people have still found ways around them. If people are unstable and determined enough, they will find a gun, regardless of the restrictions or regulations.

In today’s society, one of the most alienating issues in American politics is gun control. More specifically, the issue is whether or not guns should be banned in the United States. Some people would say that guns should be banned because it would reduce crime as a whole and keep citizens safer. These people, enthusiasts of stricter gun laws, fear being safe in their country where there are so many people who have access to guns. Opponents of this argument, however, also fear losing safety.

The use of and the owning of guns is a very hot and debated topic in society today. For many, this is a life and death debate due to the recent and numerous school shootings. These school shootings have caused an outcry for more gun control, specifically in relation to the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting. Despite these calls, increased gun control is not the answer. Most gun owners’ use their guns responsibly and for good purposes.

This paper also provides an interesting solution to gun violence; instead of already proven ineffective gun control laws, these authors suggest looking at why these laws are ineffective. Planty, Michael, and Jennifer

Everyday in the United States, ninety families are changed forever; guns claim an average of ninety lives every day in the United States, 33,000 lives in a single year. Gun control has been a debate in the United States for many years and is constantly thrusted back into the public’s attention by horrific shootings. These shootings constantly cause individuals to petition the government to place stricter and stricter regulations of guns. However, these policies cannot be the solution to this problem. To determine a solution that will be both effective and constitutional, we must look at statistics and research that has been conducted to determine the best course of action.