Why Guns Should Not Be Banned In The United States

It was time for him to draw up his weapon. Wilson told Brown move away from his car by going to the sidewalk. Wilson threatened that if Brown didn’t move he would fire his weapon. When Brown refused to move Wilson fired his gun at first nothing happened his gun just made clicking noises but all of the sudden if went off breaking the windows of his police car. Brown started to back away from Wilson in his police car and starting running down the street.

At 12:02 p.m., Mr. Wilson calls in to the dispatcher to notify about the two men while moving his police unit to block not only the two men but traffic as well. According to New York Times, a dispute started to arise between Michael Brown, who is facing the front driver’s window with his hands spread to the side to display that he means no harm, and Officer Wilson sitting on the driver’s seat of the police unit. Due to conflict between Michael Brown and Officer Wilson, two bullets were fired from Officer Wilson’s gun one hitting Mr. Brown’s thumb briefly while the second bullet missed him. After shots were fired, Michael Brown began to run east along with Officer Wilson trying to chase him on foot. Once Mr. Brown comes to a competent halt, he turns in order to face Officer Wilson.

later that night he leaped at a swat member with a kitchen knife, and the swat member had to shoot to save his life (MacDonald 16). All cops are trained for fast and appropriate responses in any situation, but especially dangerous ones. If a man attacks an officer, he will end up shot by a taser or a real handgun or rifle. The assailant in this case was a major threat to an officer 's life. The officer was forced to react..

Only if the law enforcement officer would have frisked the suspect, in the parking lot earlier and found the gun that he had in his pocket, this convicted felon would not have been able to commit this horrendous crime. Today, there are many that question the idea of “Stop and Frisk”, mainly for political reasons. The 4th amendment is clear, designed to protect from undue harm, not to protect violent felons who prey on the

In today’s modern society, many feel that is okay for a police officer can kill a man armed with a harmful weapon at any cost. On many news channels, there are various amounts of articles and reports about a police officer committing this act. Even though a police officer has the right to take action against an armed man, this could be argued in many circumstances. In the 2013, Sammy Yatim was a young adult with a mental illness and was armed with a weapon on a streetcar in Toronto. Yatim was confronted by Const.

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

His neighbor appears to be intoxicated and becomes violent when the officer reaches for his handcuffs. He takes a swing at the officer and then attempts his escape. Thirty years prior, the officer would have had the option to draw his weapon and fire or risk a dangerous car chase. Thankfully, he has a Taser gun on his belt. He is able to draw, fire, and apprehend the subject with little effort and no loss of life.

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

Hurley stated the victim fired at him first, he then shot back and fled the area. Hurley stated he was defending himself. Hurley stated he had a semi-automatic black and gray .380 pistol. After the shooting Hurley stated he ran to Anthony Smith’s residence and waited for Smith and Dudley. Hurley stated after 10 or 15 minutes he decided to leave from Smith’s residence.

In the past, the major gun control legislations that have been put into effect have not stopped people from obtaining firearms (Gun Control.) There have also been cases in the past where cities have attempted to ban handguns. After the ban was put into effect, murder rates tended to rise instead of drop, unlike what most people might assume. Crime rates and violence also skyrocketed after the bans were put into effect. Another problem with taking guns away, or banning them, is that the government cannot expect everyone to abide by the laws.

According to the Second Amendment, “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.” The Second Amendment specifically states that “the right of the people to keep

Guns are just a tool, like knives and hammers and it completely depends on the people on how they use it. People who support guns and arms say that the Second Amendment secures individual’s right to carry guns with them and that gun rights is needed for self-protection, and was intended for military to have peace and defend the country if needed (Spitzer, 70). Most of the Americans use guns as a source to protect themselves and they believe that gun ownership prevents crime. A study conducted on November 26, 2013 showed that bans on weapons did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level (Lane, 5). Moreover, even if the rules and regulations are executed on gun control, not all criminals obey the law.

In my view, guns should be banned in the United States. I simply believe there is no need for an individual with no special access or clearance to use a gun should not have one. If no ordinary citizen in America had a gun, then no-one would use the excuse "need for self-defence", this is because there are trained professionals, who 's job it is to protect others, let the police do their job and protect it 's people, not have citizens try to force themselves into the law and take matters into their own hands, it simply causes more trouble and violence for unnecessarily. I think my individual conscience let me to this opinion because of multiple reasons. These include: my surrounding environment, because in Australia since the time I was

Which true and convincing until you realize that even if we do ban guns then yes criminals can still but they illegally from the black market. But consider this, if a criminal saw a XM-15 Bushmaster or another semi-automatic gun sitting on his table, he can just pick it up and go kill people. But if those weapons were banned he would need to go through many blackmarket and illegal places, which may be unreachable to him because of his lack of knowledge. And to top it off most of the people who do a mass shooting against innocent people are not criminals they are just mentally challenged and they probably won't go through the process of going to a black market or purchasing it illegally if they had to. Of course we will never be able to stop shootings but if we make the gun harder for the shooters to get than we could lessen the gun death rate by a

Before researching more in depth, I believe bad people do bad things and banning guns will not be effective in stopping it. Australia is a great example of a country banning certain guns and the crime and homicide rate have both