The Gun Control Problems

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

The issue of gun control, more specifically whether people should be given leniency or be subject to strict laws, is one of modern times and has received a lot of attention.

From one perspective, people want to have full control of their safety and their property but at the same time, easy access to firearms could create more problems than solve. Even though change is inevitable and people are starting to possess guns and push for allowances, it is better to slow the process down as much as possible, so that people can get used to and deal with more important issues at hand.

Since the beginning of human history, people would always carry some sort of protective weapon. Spears, swords, projectile weapons and other devices would be used against the human enemy or to avoid animal attacks. Wars were commonplace in the older days, so it is understandable that people were more eager to fight and resort to violence.

The modern days have seen a lot of evolution of the human mind and understanding of the surrounding world. The government has provided organized protection of citizens in the form of army, police services and other protective organizations. It is a fact that there are places in the world that are torn apart by wars and violent conflict where people are used to carrying weapons for protection.

A much different case can be seen in the United States because peace is the end result of any civilization and human evolution. Only peace can allow for further development of peoples mind and soul whereas war, can only delay, set back or completely destroy life. It would be unwise to deny that people need protection even in the time of peace. Police and protective services cannot constantly and simultaneously be everywhere at once, so sometimes people have to fight for their life or avoidance of harm.

Examples of this are robberies, assaults and other crimes that are dominant in the modern age. It is possible to assume that if people are allowed to carry guns for protection, the world will become safer but it also means that criminals will have guns as well. All gun possession today by the criminal world is illegal and prohibited, so it is somewhat harder to get, comparing to full permission by the government. Also, if both victims and criminals carry guns, it will almost certainly be unavoidable for a gun fight to break out.

But, if there is a ban on carrying a concealed weapon, then people will have a higher chance to survive with non-fatal wounds. Of course, the extreme cases will always exist and there will always be people who will not need weapons to be violent but it is still better to have a higher chance of survival. As always, there are compromises, such as non-lethal weaponstasers, pepper spray, martial arts, protective armor, batons and many other possible solutions.

An article titled Does Gun Control Reduce Crime or Does Crime Increase Gun Control? confirms the view that the more gun control there is, the less guns there will be available for usage. If the government applies strict laws and penalties, there will be limited access, availability and incline to use weapons.

There is a rather valid point about not only the existence of laws and regulations but also the ability of the jurisdictions and services to enforce these policies. A question of whom and how the appropriate level of gun control will be decided is another issue. Many angles will have to be considered when enforcing and making policies related to gun control.

There would have to be companies and organizations that will register the firearms. These must be government controlled because private firms can make their own regulations, even to a slightest degree. If the laws are centralized by the federal government, the private companies would have to adhere to the policies, so uniformity will be guaranteed.

There would have to be training courses on the usage and safety procedures with the weapons. The sale of firearms will be controlled through background checks, limitations in the number of guns purchased within a certain period of time, as well as thorough registration of the individual product (Moorhouse and Wanner 2006). In any case, it is clear that there will be many things that will change, either the laws become stricter to control prohibition or more permissive regarding firearms.

An article The Great Gun Control War of the Twentieth Century and Its Lessons for Gun Laws Today examines the historical perspective, going back to the 1920s. Since the very beginning, there were two extreme sides, one argued that there must be a total prohibition of guns for self defense and very limited allowance for sports usage, and the other side was completely permissive. Almost from the start, the NRA (National Rifle Association) was involved in the mater on the political level.

After the Second World War, the training that people received because of NRA was appreciated, as it became useful during wartime and the period when there was an increase in the mobilization of forces. On many occasions during the American history there were riots and violent outbreaks of protestors that were accompanied by deaths due to the availability of guns and a large portion of the population was becoming outraged (Kopel 2012).

Either way the issue of guns is analyzed, it is clear that the higher the availability and permission to possess firearms, the more chances there are that someone will use weapons. Even though people argue that it should be allowed for protection of the individuals and their property, there are many other ways that people can feel safe, through governmental policies, laws and simply a careful and organized living.

A philosophical and moral view is illustrated in an article Ditching the Rubric on Gun Control: Notes from an American Moderate. The existence of the argument between those people who want guns in their hand and those who want them far away and destroyed, describes the fight between good and evil.

Humanity has created weapons for protection but the qualities that are given to the advancement of these weapons are directed towards mass destruction. The ingenuity of humans must be used for positive evolution but the opposite happens. The existence of machine guns, automatic weapons, bombs and the like is made to kill large amount of people with easiness and efficiency.

This says a lot about the purpose of the weapon, as it has got far away from self defense, to mass murder. A seemingly outrageous and inherently evil point is mentioned that these handguns and automatics were made for the purpose to exterminate people. White population would target minorities, minorities would target each other and so, all unwanted criminals will be naturally got rid of (Casteen 2004).

The scary nature of this supposition is very real, as there are many examples when these weapons were used for this specific purpose. Even though it is impossible to prove or trace back the true reasons for the creation of these high capacity weapons, it is hard to deny the usage and evidence that exists today. An article titled Mcdonald V. Chicago: Which Standard of Scrutiny Should Apply to Gun Control Laws? raises the specific laws and allowance in relation to guns being used by different types of people.

It notes a perspective that even criminals and those involved in drug trafficking or other prohibited activities might really need to carry weapons for protection. Even though they are breaking the law, the nature of their living conditions seems to allow them more rights to protect themselves. This is a very farfetched view and will most likely have minimal support.

The article also mentions that in case handguns become allowed with a permission to carry without concealment, it would lead to gang members carrying their weapons openly. As a consequence, this law would negate the right of authorities to search or frisk these individuals. As a result, there will be even less control of possession of firearms or other illegal items (Rosenthal and Malcolm 2011).

The inevitable nature of people getting more rights and freedoms suggests that restrictions on firearms will be lessened. This knowledge should be enough to make people and governments realize that laws prohibiting weapon usage should be increased and enforced through even stricter regulations. Guns should not be a part of any civilization, as there is only one resultself-destruction.

Works Cited

Casteen, John. Ditching the Rubric on Gun Control: Notes from an American Moderate. The Virginia Quarterly Review, 80.4 (2004): n. pag. Web.11 June 2013.

Kopel, David. The Great Gun Control War of the Twentieth Century and Its Lessons for Gun Laws Today. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 39.5 (2012): n. pag. Web.11 June 2013.

Moorhouse, John and Brent Wanner. Does Gun Control Reduce Crime or Does Crime Increase Gun Control? The Cato Journal, 26.1(2006): n. pag. Web.11 June 2013.

Rosenthal, Lawrence and Joyce Malcolm. Mcdonald V. Chicago: Which Standard Of Scrutiny Should Apply To Gun Control Laws? Northwestern University Law Review, 105.1 (2011): n. pag. Web.11 June 2013.

Click Here To Order Now!

The Gun Control Problems

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)