Category: Gun Control

Why do we have school shootings? What can we do to prevent it from happening? One of the first mass school shootings that happened on April 9,1891, at St. Mary’s Parochial School, Newburgh, New York., 1891. When James Foster fired a gunshot at a group of students causing minor injuries to several of the students. School shootings are known to happen when someone wants to get back at whomever hurt them, Otherwise, if a kid gets picked on, make fun of, or bully on will make a kid feel as if they’re no value to life.

In the United State, on April 20,1999, Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, two students killed 12 classmates and one teacher. The State and federal governments responded as quickly as they can for the Columbine shooting they ended up investing in visible security measures such as school resource officers, metal detectors, and surveillance equipment. Having school officers helps substantially because it lets kids know that there will always be someone there to help immediately if something was to ever happen. Having Metal Detectors is a controversial move. The Metal Detectors is there to keep schools safe “…stationary metal detectors used on a daily basis are typically limited to large urban school districts with a chronic history of weapons-related offenses.”(National School Safety and Security Services), This fact shows that their a lot of problems concerning large urban school districts and their safety. Students come from different backgrounds, and end up mix into one committee, and they all have adapted to each other, and some students has a hard time doing that and that’s why schools need mental health servers within the school system so children can have someone to talk to when they need it. Mental health, matters in school because “…1 in 5 children and youth have a diagnosable emotional, behavioral or mental health disorder and 1 in 10 young people have a mental health challenge that is severe enough to impair how they function at home, school or in the community.” Mental health starts at home as the child grows up. Only 40 percent of students with emotional behavioral problem graduates from high school and children with behavioral disabilities ages 14 and older dropout of high school. This is one of the main reasons we need Mental health services. Kids need to have someone to talk to that they trust, so they don’t need up doing someone with anger like cutting their self or shooting up their schools. Students with positive constraints incorporate academic success has peers and adult relationships, adults that support them. As for Student that don’t have support in there live develop patterns of aggressive behavior due to anger or resentment towards others.

The National Education Association, focus on mental health within the school setting and mental health counselors. Throughout their process they recognize that the majority of people struggling with a mental illness is not dangerous, mental health treatment can help prevent gun violence for many individuals. The United State’s plan is to first address a gun violence problem. There has been “comprehensive” school safety plans that happened over the last 20 years. Some has effectively and thoroughly addressed the issue common in all school shootings but not all. The gun violence prevention solutions work hand in hand with school to ensure that school shootings do not happen. In schools before a school shooting occurs, students usually know who will shoot up the school because of the behavior of that student. Students in America, today wants to stop this problem by making sure teams are not alone. On the PBS News Hours Extra teens talk about what they would do to prevent school shootings happening and one that really popped out to me was by Aaron a 12th grade in Alexandria, Indiana. This young man talks about how he is a proud supporter to own a firearm but then goes back and say firearm, not weapon. He’s reason for saying that is because he feels unsafe knowing that someone can walk into his school at any time and let off there forearmed. The question should schools allow having an armed policemen on school property to help prevent school shootings from happening? From my point of view it do not help prevent school shootings because students come from different backgrounds as stated before and that could lead to having lots of problems in the school community. Not every child thinks that Cops keeps them safe and that’s one of the main reasons why policeman’s should not be allowed to be armed on school property. According to The Trace “ The only thing that storms a bad guy with guns is a good guy with a gun.’’ I disagree with the statement because this idea telling students that the only thing that can stop violence is with violence. And is telling students that if they want to feel safe, they have to bring a gun or any form of weapon to stop a bad guy and this is not helping prevent school shooting . “In 2003, more than $350 million in funding was made available for public K-12 schools to purchase security technology through the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) after schools were identified as potential sites for terrorist attacks.” and after that “Another senseless tragedy occurred on December 14, 2012, when a gunman entered Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, and killed 26 children and educators. Soon after, the Connecticut Legislature passed new safety laws that appropriated $42 million for security grants to Connecticut schools.” The United State is focused on hiring security for schools but, what they need to focus on are the children mental health because that’s where violence begin. Children don’t need officers to feel safe they need somebody to talk to, they need to know that someone’s on their side and that their here for them when they need help, someone they can go just to talk about there day and that’s what schools should be focused on having concealer for students to talk to when they need to. President Trump says he’s determined to put an end to school shootings in the U.S. but what are his plans. Trump allowed school teachers to carry concealed weapons in the classroom. Now, this idea is a bad move just like students, teachers could easily pull out a gun if they feel treated in any sort of way. Just because a teacher is older and more muchier does no mean that they won’t pull out a gun if they feel threatened in any sort of way. “Most law enforcement experts argue that teachers should not carry guns. Civilians may be able to hit a bull’s-eye at the shooting range, but they lack the tactical knowledge of handling weapons that trained law enforcement personnel get. Accidents happen. Guns can fall out of holsters, be taken from the classroom or accidentally discharge.

“You don’t want to have a gun that’s available to a student or another worker who may have mental health issues,” said Maureen S. Rush, vice president for public safety and superintendent of the Police Department at the University of Pennsylvania.”(The New York Times In The Headlines School Shootings How Can We Stop Them? Page 145). This is a great fact because it’s tell the truth. If we allow teachers with mental health issues to have a gun in schools there would be a greater risk of have a shooting happen at school. Naomi Wadler organized a walk out on March 14, to impact her city after the Stoneman shooting the first time she asked the principal he turned her down because she needed parental supervision and that did not stop her from making her movement Naomi Wadler fought for what she believed in and the walkout happened Wadler ended up get over 2,500 students and teachers across America to participate in the national school walkout. (Glimmer of Hope by the founders of Marsh for our Lives page 141). This shows that students wants to make a change within the school system to make it safe for students but they need help to do so and that’s where the concealer will come in. After one of the deadliest school shooting in at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida, got an email from Shane Jimerson, a professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara and email was about preventing gun violence in the United States. Their message was “Don’t harden schools. Make them softer, by improving social and emotional health.” This was a start of a plan to prevent gun violence in schools. The first step was “School climate may sound fuzzy or abstract.” and that means that the schools community has to be strong when it comes to relationships with the students and the adults in a school. Then second step is to cut down on violence. “The role of the witness.” If you see something do something don’t let it grow into a fight when you have to power to stop it from happening and, after that all you would need is in emergency mode if someone brings a weapon to school or talking about violence. The Call For Action To Prevent Gun Violence in the United States Of America was created by Shane Jimerson the steps that she came up with are “A national requirement for all schools to assess school climate and maintain physically and emotionally safe conditions and positive school environments that protect all students and adults from bullying, discrimination, harassment, and assault;” I believe that this is one of the first step that the United States should take because not only its focus on there safety they focus on the emotion of the students and the staff.

On May 21, 2018, Chip Grabow and Lisa Rose from CNN made a chart on what countries has the most a less school shootings and America came out to having the most worldwide but why what is the difference between other countries like The United States, Canada, Brazil and Japan.

Seen 2009 to 2018 the United States had over 288 school shootings as for Canada they had 2 school shootings over that time period. Why is that? Canada’s government is uninterested in finding innovative solutions to gun violence because they believed that it will help decrease school shootings. The way Canada prevent school shooting is by the local level and things that can be done by the Federal Government. At the Local level mass school shootings could have been prevented because the warning signs were obvious but no one stopped them and at the Federal level they could have help with stricter gun control laws but they made it clear that they would not help.

Brazil also has 2 school shootings over the timeline between 2009 and 2018. In 2003 a disarmament law effectively prevented most Brazilians from buying guns and is was the first action to prevent school shootings. The disarmament law was a requires citizens who want to purchase a gun to prove that they need it and to get the police to agree. After two former pupils killed five teenagers. Brazilian wanted the country’s firearms laws to be relaxed. The Brazilian are debating on getting rid of the gun laws but they think it’s going to keep them safe but they have to realize that if they get rid of the gun laws there allowing cicaplast the permission to have a gun. That would be putting kids in harm way. There mother or father will have to be afraid for their children every time they leave the house. Today Brazil Government Doubles Down on Pro-Gun Stance After School Shooting and this happened because of one of the worst school shooting that they had.

Japan has a one school shooting within the time 2009 to 2018 and this is how. “Japan has a long list of tests that applicants must pass before gaining access to a small pool of guns.” this shows that Japan is very serious when it comes to guns. In Japan the law no one can get a gun or a sword without passing the test. Because of those law japan see about 10 gun death throw out each year. “If Japanese people want to own a gun, they must attend an all-day class, pass a written test, and achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test.” this is a good idea because before someone own a gun they need to know how to use it. Japan also has a role of trust that can’t be broken.

Mass violence in public schools needs to stop. Every time theres a school shooting we lose a dear friend or someone that we love. When we look back at the countries they all have to do it laws and the government. Which means those are the things that we need to fix in order to stop mass violence in schools. Just like in Canada one of the steps should be demanding what you want to the government. The thing that we should demand of people to take classes on guns if they want to owner a gun. Although people have a right to own a gun that’s also what’s putting people in danger. People think you can fight guns with guns but what is the point of killing people when you can use your words and talk it out. The only reason someone would need a gun is if someone is on the run from someone whos trying to kill them. When that law passed there would be no reason for the police to have guns because there would be no guns in the street which makes America a better place to live because its getting rid of police portaddly. The only reason a police officer should have a gun on them is if they got a call that something is dangerous.

If indeed guns do not kill, then why do mass killers have to arm themselves with guns? As a mother and concerned citizen, I feel that the government ought to take action to end the unnecessary loss of innocent lives we tragically lose every day. Gun ownership and violence has been a controversial issue in the US for centuries. Approximately 40% of Americans own guns or live in households with deadly weapons (Legault, Hendrix, and Lizotte, 2019). The US is the leading country globally in civilian gun ownership. The number Americans who own guns is twice the number of Yemenis who own firearms, yet Yemen comes second globally in the list of countries with the most civilian-owned guns (Luca, Malhotra and Poliquin, 2019). Although almost half the number of homesteads in the US have access to firearms most of them buy weapons for protection. Cases of manslaughter and murder by firearms are highest in the country. Currently, 73% of gun-related killings in the US are homicides and since 1982, there have been more than 110 mass shootings in the US (Luca, Malhotra and Poliquin, 2019). The issue of gun violence is no longer an ordinary discussion but an epidemic we must put a stop to.

Gun violence and ownership has been one of the greatest challenges in the US (Legault, Hendrix, and Lizotte, 2019). In 2015, there were 36,252 gun related deaths in the US (Legault, Hendrix, and Lizotte, 2019). In 2016, the number increased to 37,200 while in 2017, 39,773 people lost their lives from gun related injuries (Legault, Hendrix, and Lizotte, 2019). The number of firearm deaths has been increasing gradually in the US. Texans comprise millions of Americans who suffer greatly from gun violence. Two-thirds of the total number of homicides in the state are committed with guns (Luca, Malhotra and Poliquin, 2019). In 2016, Texas ranked twenty seventh in the US regarding gun related deaths (Luca, Malhotra and Poliquin, 2019). The state recorded 3,353 firearm deaths. Unfortunately, 85% of the guns which were used to commit the crimes came from within the state. In 2017, the number of firearm deaths in the state increased to 3,513 (Luca, Malhotra and Poliquin, 2019). Of course, there are other states like Alaska, Louisiana, and Alabama with higher rates of firearm violence than Texas. Nevertheless, every American life matters.

Honorable Vela, everyone is tired of watching too many people dying in Texas. The status quo in the state is a despicable one. Unfortunately, the situation continues to deteriorate, and the government ought to act. I believe the deadly shooting rampage which occurred on September 1st, 2019 ought to be an eye opener to the seriousness of gun violence in the state of Texas. The mass shooting in Midland-Odessa in which a man in his 30s shot dead seven people and left 21 others with serious injuries has raised a lot of questions (Newman and Hartman, 2019). Texans feel that the state and the local government have failed in their task to protect the people of Texas from harm. What disheartens even more is the fact that the September 1st shooting came exactly one month after another deadlier shooting. The August 3rd mass shooting inside Walmart in El Paso Texas in which 20 people died while 26 others survived with serious injuries remains one of the most fatal in the history of Texas and the US (Newman and Hartman, 2019). For how long will the state and local government continue watching irresponsible gun handlers end Texans’ lives so immaturely?

I understand that the Second Amendment of the US constitution constitutes the nation’s Bill of Rights which protects every American right to hold and bear arms (Luca, Malhotra and Poliquin, 2019). Of course, nothing cements the unity of any country’s citizens like the laws which protect their rights (Newman and Hartman, 2019). Even so, the open-ended nature of Amendment II makes it one of the most contested ordinances in the US Bill of Rights. What makes Americans situation even more unfortunate is that even the Fifth Amendment to the US constitution which also constitutes the Bill of Rights has failed to curb the menace of gun violence in the US. The bill which enumerates key personal liberties protects people from answering for capital or other forms of infamous crimes, unless in an accusation of a Grand Jury (Luca, Malhotra and Poliquin, 2019). The two bills which ought to protect American lives from harm have exposed them to more danger. Surprisingly, most legislators contribute to the failure of constituents’ security. They show strange laxity in enacting laws that can protect Texans for such unnecessary deaths. For instance, Texan legislators passed Senate Bill 535 which allows residents of the state to carry protective guns to places of worship like churches and synagogues almost two years after the mass shooting in Sutherland Springs Church on November 5th, 2017 (Luca, Malhotra and Poliquin, 2019). Texan legislators showed negligence even though 26 people died, and 20 others survived with wounds. Besides, there are occasions when Texan legislators have passed bills which subtly promote gun violence instead of curbing the menace. The Texan Senate Bill 741 which prohibits associations of property owners from banning the storage of guns in rental houses is such an example.

Congressman Vela, I have been one of your greatest supporters since 2013. I believe in your potential and your willingness to work for the people of Texas, for the betterment of the state. There is a need for you to push for the review of gun control laws in Texas. I humbly request that you advocate for the enactment of the Universal Background Checks law. I hope you understand that there is a dangerous loophole in the federal laws which still pardons unlicensed gun sellers from running background checks on potential gun buyers before issuing firearms (Legault, Hendrix, and Lizotte, 2019). It is as a result of such laws that the number of homicide cases have dramatically increased in our state. Therefore, I feel it would be unthoughtful for us to seek solution from the federal government. Maybe we could begin by passing the Universal Background Check bill or come up with another bill which approximates it. I believe the federal government would join us in bettering the situation after they see our efforts. Moreover, elections are nearing, and I believe that if you make a move to pass laws which can end gun violence in Texas, your efforts will no doubt work in your favor. Already, 90% of Americans, support the Universal Background Checks bill (Legault, Hendrix, and Lizotte, 2019). It is your time to show your potential by advocating for the enactment of the bill in Texas. I feel it is one of the most reliable approaches which if implemented, can keep firearms away from dangerous hands? Yes, we can. Majority of Republican legislators have been skeptical about the bill (Luca, Malhotra and Poliquin, 2019). Nevertheless, be your people’s mouthpiece. Make the legislators who oppose the matter understand that the issue is not about politics but the safety of Texans.

References

1. Legault, R. L., Hendrix, N., & Lizotte, A. J. (2019). Caught in a crossfire: Legal and illegal gun ownership in America. In Handbook on crime and deviance (pp. 533-554). Springer, Cham.
2. Luca, M., Malhotra, D., & Poliquin, C. (2019). The impact of mass shootings on gun policy (No. w26187). National Bureau of Economic Research.
3. Newman, B. J., & Hartman, T. K. (2019). Mass shootings and public support for gun control. British Journal of Political Science, 49(4), 1527-1553.

Gun control doesn’t decrease gun possession by criminals, however instead reduces their incentives to refrain from violence as a result of it decreases the provision of armed law-abiding voters World Health Organization would possibly resist them.

The increase of gun violence has been Associate in Nursing escalating matter in recent years, currently reaching the purpose of being a crisis here within the us.Various countries have already taken steps into fixing this burden, such as: smart gun laws, a rise of security and caution with reference to getting and also the use of gun laws, or the entire removal of guns to the overall public.

Gun violence can be a daily tragedy moving the lives of individuals around the world. Over 5 hundred people die on a routine due to violence committed with firearms. Anyone may be the victim of piece violence, however additional usually than not, minority teams square measure heavily targeted in these tragedies, such as: coloured individuals, sure spiritual teams, sure identities, and folks of a special sexual orientation. for instance, youngsters and youths of color square measure fourteen times additional seemingly to die from gun violence than white youngsters and youths.

Switzerland’s laws and rules touching on gun laws has resulted in eighteen years of no mass shootings. On the opposite hand, the U.S has had a mass shooting nearly each few months. the quantity of mass shootings within the North American nation this year has already reached 289, as of Sept three, 2019. If all the death isn’t enough, gun violence takes up around $229 billion annually, thanks to the inclusion of: emergency services, enforcement, and medical services. America’s gun violence drawback should be self-addressed if we tend to square measure to effectively reply to the crisis facing our healthcare system, urban communities, and independent agency. during this country it’s too straightforward for dangerous individuals to get dangerous weapons there square measure solely a couple of federal gun laws and even those have loopholes. Violence isn’t one thing of this, it’s forever been Associate in Nursing existing issue — however the statistics are at an incredible rate year once year. four-hundredths of all homes within the U.S. have a piece in them, which means Associate in Nursing raised likelihood of getting unintentional firearm-related death among youngsters. The technique to stay youngsters off from this fate is to create positive that there is no likelihood of it happening the least bit.

A popular plan of an answer is to ban guns altogether, however others desire that would not build a distinction. the matter isn’t that individuals own guns — it’s that individuals use them for the wrong reasons. in spite of however persistent individuals square measure into obtaining eliminate guns, it will not be doable as a result of individuals square measure simply too stubborn and can positively notice the simplest way to import them in.

Although forbidding guns might not be the simplest possibility, there’s still hope for different doable solutions. for instance, procedural checkups and increased security once buying a gun, raised coaching and raised restrictions once victimization guns, and taking the responsibility to see for licensing once buying/selling a gun to make sure that the client and merchant square measure each conducive to enhance public safety. Federal law already requires gun dealers to report lost or purloined firearms. many states, as well as the big apple, Ohio, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Massachusetts, need homeowners to report lost or purloined guns.

There square measure sure precautions that the govt. will enforce. These precautions will not halt gun violence right away, however they’re definite steps to assist bit by bit scale back the quantity of violence that’s going down. one in every of the largest mass shooting that has ever happened was on Oct one, 2017 a gunman opened fire on a crowd of concert goers at the route ninety one harvest music pageant at the urban center strip in Battle Born State. Killing fifty eight individuals and wounding 422, the injury total was 851. This was the most important mass shooting in U.S. history.

Gun control has been an arguable topic within the news for years. many of us square measure involved that it’s too straightforward to have a gun and that’s why numerous shootings happen. the govt. is infringing on their rights to have a gun, some native governments have their own laws that regulate firearms. the proper to stay and bear arms is protected by the second change to the US Constitution.

Nearly 1.3 million individuals die in an exceedingly road crashes annually, on average three,287 deaths every day. On the opposite hand, in 2013, there have been thirty three,636 deaths thanks to injury by firearms, once it’s calculable that there square measure additional guns within the U.S. than cars.

If we tend to fail to exercise our rights in an exceedingly respectful method, we tend to run the chance of those rights being vulnerable. One rotten apple will spoil the bunch, feckless gun homeowners World Health Organization do foolish and even tragic things. Yankee is one in every of the countries that has not gone through the matter of gun violence, Effective solutions which will scale back gun violence obviously is that the Brady law [ Brady shooting iron Violence interference Act ] in 1993, the assault weapon ban in 1994. throughout the primary ten years of the Brady law gun killing born thirty seventh whereas different gun violence born seventy three, contrary throughout general years gun violence drastically raised because the administration and Congress weakened the Brady law that allowed the assault weapons ban to expire, bestowing the gun business peculiar legal protection. President Obama’s successor, Donald Trump campaigned on dismantlement Obama;s government orders on regulation. Shortly once taking workplace,

President Trump acted upon his promise, sign language a resolution into law in February 2017 that removed a provision that needed the Social SecurityAdministration to submit psychological state info to NICS. Gun rights advocates and policymakers have sought-after to expand gun rights underneath the Trump administration. Following the 2016 presidential election, many states advanced legislation to allow the carrying of a piece while not a license and also the carrying of firearms on public university campuses. throughout President Trump’s initial year in workplace, gun violence once more prompted calls to come back regulation legislation. In June 2017, on every occasion a vital tragedy happens, the revelation tends to center of attention on addressing a selected venue. If we tend to all tried onerous we will doubtlessly stop gun violence once and for all.

Gun control laws have been enforced in the United States for several years. Gun violence is becoming a continuous nationwide problem. The United States has the highest rate of gun deaths in the world. Japan and Australia are among the few countries who have the least gun violence due to the strict laws of prohibiting citizens from owning firearms. There has been an ongoing debate for years whether more gun control laws should be enforced and what needs to be put into action to resolve the situation. The majority of mass shootings have been caused by someone with an untreated mental illness. The tragic mass shootings in Parkland, Newton, and Aurora were all involving an offender who claimed to have a mental illness after the incident occurred. It is important to take appropriate measures when dealing with a criminal who has a mental illness, but it should not be an excuse for causing such mass chaos and the loss of lives. Many offenders purchased firearms illegally or did not have any medical diagnosis, so they were able to purchase one themselves. Therefore, enforcing more gun control laws is not the solution to reducing gun violence because gun control does not stop someone from causing a tragedy. Mental illnesses are treatable but there is a lack of access to mental health services. These illnesses affect a person’s mood, cognition, and behavior. Examples of mental illness include schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, and bipolar disorder. Untreated psychosis can result in an individual indulging in uncontrollable violent behavior. The ideal strategy to reduce gun deaths and mass shootings in the United States is to allow mental health services to be more accessible while also conducting medical evaluations to determine if one is fit to purchase a firearm. Appropriate early intervention and identification must be available to help reduce gun violence along with proper treatment and support.

Medical evaluations need to be performed prior to purchasing a firearm. Claiming insanity to avoid harsh consequences is not an excuse for those whose lives were lost due to gun violence. Insanity should be tested prior to purchasing a firearm to prevent gun violence instead of after the incident occurred. Clinical Professor of Neurosurgery, Miguel Faria Jr. suggests, “investigation and further lethal developments in these three aforementioned incidents represent cases of criminal insanity associated with regrettable failures in the mental health system, rather than the assigned of blame with the easy cliché of too many guns in the hands of the people” (85). Nikolas Cruz, the Parkland school shooter, is an example of an individual with several mental disorders such as depression, ADHD, and autism but was able to legally purchase an AR-15 rifle. Cruz claimed insanity and underlying mental problems were the cause of his actions. If there was more funding for mental health services and more thorough medical history background checks, then the devastating loss of seventeen innocent lives could have possibly been prevented. Most people who own a firearm in America for safety purposes or for a hobby of theirs, use these weapons rightfully so it should not have to be taken away from them because of crazed individuals who used their weapon illegally and committed mass chaos or murders (86). The Second Amendment states that citizens have the right to bear arms and taking this right away from people will infringe the amendment. Also, it is not right for people to lose their accessibility to firearms who use them legally. This is an example showing that more medical evaluations must be enforced.

Several mental disorders such as schizophrenia, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and bipolar disorder determine a higher risk for gun violence. Jordan Beardslee, doctor and psychology professor, and his colleagues confirmed “this study clearly indicates that boys with higher conduct problems and peer delinquency in early childhood are at heightened risk of carrying a gun in adolescence” (117). Individuals often behave based on who they surround themselves with and the area they grew up in. Children who associate with trouble making acquaintances and show violent behavior in grade school should be primary targets when trying to find solutions to prevent children from getting involved in gun-related violence (117). Jeffrey Swanson and multiple doctors acknowledge another cause of violence is “impulsive angry behavior conveys inherent risk of aggressive or violent acts” (200). It is important for parents to find symptoms of any mental disorder so the child can get treatment immediately and get the necessary therapy or medication. Anger can lead to violent behavior and show signs of underlying mental issues (200). This provides cause and effect by showing that children who grow up and are exposed early to violent or negative behavior can cause them to be violent when they grow up.

Many young people have a diagnosable mental illness. Therefore, increasing mental health services would help reduce gun violence. Rhonda Lewis and Mai Huynh, doctors in psychology, addressed “thus, there needs to be an analysis of the literature about what is really happening to people living with a mental illness instead of portraying them as being mass shooters” (757). The media is the key source that provides society with information on mass shootings which allows people to label and spread information. This causes people to automatically assume any future incident involving firearms is initiated by someone with a mental illness. Mental health services need to be available and a priority to everyone as health care is because an increase in these services could prohibit individuals with undiagnosed mental issues from causing potential chaos (757). More insurance companies must cover mental health services as most do health care because many people do not receive mental services due to not being able to afford it. This provides process and example as it explores ways to allow mental services to be more accessible and why it should be a priority to all.

Though some offenders may have purchased their firearms illegally, they did not receive a medical diagnosis until after the incident occurred. Professor of social welfare, Jason Matejkowski and colleagues note “educational programs aimed at family members and inmates of persons with SMI that provide information about mental illness, coping strategies, and how to manage aggressive behavior could be helpful in reducing the murder rates among close relations of persons with severe mental illness” (368). More knowledge of mental illnesses and how to properly cope with emotions and anger must be provided. Half of the criminals with severe mental illness (SMI) used a firearm when committing their crime so restricting firearms from the mentally ill overall and providing more mental health services is ideal to reduce the violent use of firearms (368). An example is provided by explaining that many criminals have a mental disorder and were still able to purchase a firearm.

There are many reasons why stricter gun laws regarding mental illness should be enforced along with an increase in mental health services to reduce the amount of gun violence occurrences. This will allow more individuals with undiagnosed mental disorders to seek proper treatment and or medication. Due to the majority of mass shootings being caused by someone who had or claimed to have a mental illness, stronger background checks of any possible mental health issues will reduce gun deaths. People suffering from a mental illness should not be viewed as dangerous. They are at heightened risk for violence due to suicidal thoughts, feelings of loneliness, and untreated mental illness. The people who finally receive diagnoses and treatment will not feel like outsiders if services are increased and more people receive them. Republicans have put forth action on this situation by providing a safe environment for developing minds. To do so, several republican governors have increased mental health training among teachers while also increasing student’s accessibility to school counseling. Mental health treatment will prevent gun violence. The lack of knowledge or care on the situation is the primary factor preventing these solutions to reduce the rate of gun violence. Stricter gun laws can go against the Second Amendment; thus, the stricter background checks should be focused on an individual’s mental state to determine if they are mentally stable enough to own a gun. Many people who are mentally stable purchase a firearm just for their sense of security. Gun owners believe they could stop possible mass chaos or protect themselves and for this reason gun restrictions should be primarily focused on one’s mental state.

Given these points, the slow increase of mental health services and gun laws will help reduce the rate of deaths to gun violence. Mental illness should be a priority to everyone, as many people suffer silently because they do not know what is wrong with them or want to admit something is wrong. Through further knowledge and studies, expectantly, mental health services will be more accessible while guns are being prevented from getting into the wrong hands. Enforcing this solution will allow individuals to get the proper mental health services they need. More educational programs must also be provided on the issue. Educational programs will teach individuals how to properly deal with anger and avoid violent acts. Providing treatment for all individuals suffering from a mental disorder should be a nationwide priority. People in society will also feel safer knowing some action is being taken. Working to make strong mental health is a goal everyone should strive for. Therefore, stricter gun laws must be enforced to ensure the safety of our nation. The reoccurring cycle of mass shooting is not going to decline without a change.

Gun control’ alludes to any legitimate measure proposed to stop or confine the ownership or utilization of firearms, especially guns. In a more extensive sense, the term additionally alludes as far as possible on the ownership or utilization of different arms. In most nations, weapon control is severe and uncontroversial. In others, it is a full political issue, setting the individuals who see it as important for open wellbeing against the individuals who see it as a dangerous to individual freedom. No place on the planet is weapon control more disputable than in the United States, where weapon ownership is unavoidably secured yet where murders submitted with firearms are incredibly normal; the United States has by a wide margin the most elevated manslaughter by-gun rate among created nations. Advocates of expanded weapon control in the United States say that restricting access to firearms will spare lives and diminish wrongdoing; people against gun control demand that it would really do the complete opposite by anticipating well behaved residents from protecting themselves against equipped criminals.

When it comes to health issues gun violence is a huge crisis. Through different kinds of research, it is said that gun control should be notified as a public issue. Reasons this is a health issue is because it causes harm to loved one’s families, as well as, death to loved ones which is a permanent scar for many. Continuing schools are raised around gun violence and could potentially be influenced from being around gun violence so long. Lastly with so many shootings happening at big events this can cause mental issues for people who cannot handle the kind of violence.

To adopt a proactive strategy and teach people on weapon security, general wellbeing experts initially need to persuade individuals this emergency is about more than the criminal demonstration of hurting others: It’s additionally about the well-being of the whole world. This requires different sides of issues between weapon rights and firearm control. Having the privilege instructive foundation, for example, a graduate degree in general wellbeing, can help general wellbeing experts create appropriate guidance to successfully explore the differing political and financial pressures encompassing this issue.

The target area is towards everyone because it could happen to anyone at any time. Just in the United states alone over a 100 people die a day which includes suicide, homicides, third party shootings, and even unintentional shootings. If everyone becomes aware of these they could potentially take it more serious. Over millions of guns are in different countries. One out of every three homes have some type of gun in their household. Also, over 1 million households have unsecured guns which causes death to children throughout the time. Public campaigns are needed to play a role in letting the audience know how to be responsible with guns or should not have them around. This could cause less mental health if used properly.

From an economic perspective having a product illegal is an open door for illegal markets. Shutting down the legitimate markets for an item makes it increasingly hard for providers. The cost of the product will increment, since it is progressively hard to give. As costs rise, the potential for benefits increments. A few people will disregard the law and take the chance with danger of fines or prison time. They will be pulled in by the quick money and make an illegal market for the ware. Thus, it is with the medication exchange, where a bootleg market flourishes in our downtowns. For youngsters who have dropped out of school or graduated with barely any interest in school, the market may have all the attentions of being their best ‘opening for work.

An example of political situations for gun control for example is the following day the Senate dismissed a bill to fix record verification prerequisites on would-be firearm purchasers — similarly as it did in 2013, soon after a shooter killed six grown-ups and 20 kids at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. One little weapon control measure embraced by the Trump organization was the forbidding of knock stocks, a device that permits self-loading rifles to discharge as quick as automatics, after the Las Vegas shooting. The boycott, which produced results in March. The issue of how to find harmony between weapon rights and open wellbeing has been a political hot potato for a considerable length of time, and one that Congress has managed carefully, if by any stretch of the imagination. The political atmosphere of 2019 would barely appear to be ready for activity on the issue. Republicans for the most part contradict any sort of weapon control enactment — just four of 54 Senate Republicans casted a ballot for the 2015 record verification bill.

The proposals underneath start with thoughtfulness regarding decreasing impending dangers identified with firearms, widen to deliver the basic supporters of weapon danger, and afterward address the avoidance foundation important to guarantee a more effective approach. Additionally, incorporating suggestions identified with new research and practice will help guarantee learning, enhance, and increment the effect towards the audience on gun control. The arrangement of proposals represents that one program or approach alone will not fundamentally lessen firearm brutality, yet rather, through extensive systems, can accomplish security in homes, schools, and networks.

First, to help reduce lethality through guns these steps should be takened; there should be a reduction on easy access to dangerous firearms, gun industries need to be held accountable for situations involving guns, an engagement in responsible gun dealers and owners need to be made, and require a safe firearm storage. Secondly to help towards families and others with health issues; recognize gun violence as a very serious situation and know how to prevent it, support plans that are to help the community and best if all get quality help with mental issues from gun violence by getting mental health support through emotions, social and trauma. Lastly, research is always important to help prevent worse situations for an individual or public. Having group healings can help prevent community traumas, Technology can play a major role in gun safety and self-defense technology, and have healthy norms.

Firearm violence is a main source of unexpected death in the nation. However, in contrast to other preventable reasons for death, we haven’t summoned the political will to address it. Firearm savagery is most seen when different individuals pass on the double, yet it influences an excessive number of networks and families regularly whether through suicide, abusive behavior at home, network brutality, or different structures. Information shows that hazard for gun savagery changes significantly by age, race, sexual orientation, and topography, in designs that are very extraordinary for suicide and manslaughter. Through a general wellbeing approach, violence is preventable over the entirety of its structures. The general wellbeing approach thinks about information on different types of brutality and who is influenced and distinguishes the greatest hazard factors and what’s defensive, and creates strategy, practice, and program arrangements in organization with different segments and network individuals.

Stunned by the everyday violence, firearm violence in America is a general health emergency. From that point forward, many thousands additional Americans have passed on in weapon brutality, in mass shootings and suicides, occurrences that regularly dazed the country and here and there went unnoticed even locally. Strong policies are being made from banning bump stocks to opposing concealed carry reciprocity legislation.

Individuals are being killed in homes, houses of worship, schools, on city intersections and at open social events, and it’s significant that officials, approach and promoters on all sides look for shared belief to address this general health emergency. Consistently, doctors are treating suicide exploited people, casualties of domestic violence and people that are at an unlucky spot. These kinds of these do not have to end this way, actions can be takened through lawmakers. They need to act or this will continue to happen.

1. American Psychological Association, American Psychological Association, https://www.apa.org/pubs/info/reports/gun-violence-prevention.
2. Skorton, David J. “Gun Violence Is a Health Crisis, Not a Political Football. It’s Time to Act: Cardiologist.” USA Today, Gannett Satellite Information Network, 10 Sept. 2019, https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/09/10/gun-violence-public-health-crisis-requires-action-doctor-column/2268282001/.

Did you know that to this day, gun deaths are one of the leading causes of death in all of America. Shootings could be on purpose or on accident, however it is still never ok. Getting shot can change the lives of not only the victim, but also their family and friends forever. Surviving a bullet shot is highly unlikely, depending on the location of being shot, but nobody should ever have to be in fear for their life. A bullet can do some serious damage to the human body, some may even have to lose an arm or a leg. It can also depend on the kind of gun used, different weapons have bigger bullets, shoot faster, harder, or even more accurate. Gun violence laws should be revised to reduce the amount of deaths and the risk of death for America lives.

There is no doubt that guns were originally made to kill people in war hundred of years ago. However using them on innocent or out of rage on people is not right, there can be many other ways to solve a problem rather than taking a life. A two year old in Maryland, Tyree Flint, “had found a handgun…in a bedroom while others people in the home were sleeping” (Penzenstadler). According to KMGH, a 2-year-old pulled down a loaded 12-gauge pump shotgun from a towel rack and shot himself in the head.” Recently on May 5 2019, 1 student dead and 8 injured at Highlands Ranch School in Colorado, “Douglas County Sheriff Tony Spurlock said the suspects – a juvenile and an adult…authorities recovered three handguns and a rifle.” Known as the worst High School shooting in American history, “In February 2018, a school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL left 17 people dead and 14 wounded. The teen shooter used an AR-15 semi-automatic style weapon,” 3 months later on May 18, 2018, at Santa Fe High School “a teen shooter used a shotgun and a .38-caliber revolver that he took from his father to kill 10 people and wound 10 others” (Mitros). In Southwest Washington, twenty eight year old Ryan Matthew Addison was shot on August 11, 2015, “authorities say a suspected gang member from Virginia mistakenly believed Addison had killed one of the alleged gunman’s friends” (Hermann).

Coming home from work and finding out your child has found your gun and shot themselves is devastating, whether accidentally or suicide. How do they find the gun in the first place. Going to an event or party, and a shooter comes in with an assault rifle, holding the trigger spraying bullets left and right. There is nothing to do except wait until cops come or a bullet hits you. There are people out there in the US that get so angry at one another, they will have a shootout in a neighborhood. Weather its a group of people or just two people, they wouldn’t stop until somebody dies. Nobody should ever experience being shot or in the middle of gun fire.

Not all laws in the United States are the same for owning guns, each state has their own set of laws that they must think works best for their state. According to SafeHome, the highest rate of firearm ownership in the United States is Alaska, “with nearly 62 percent of adults owning a gun” while delaware has a firearm ownership of nearly 5 percent. The leading cause of firearm deaths are actually suicide, “almost two-thirds of all gun-related deaths in the U.S,” and then homicide with nearly 33 percent. The state with the highest suicide rate is Alaska while, “Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and New Jersey have the lowest firearm suicide rates,” and the state with the highest murder rates are Louisiana and Mississippi at nearly 9 percent, while the lowest murder by firearm is massachusetts.

All of the states in the United States support owning a firearm, however some states and their laws are just not good enough to prevent and reduce gun violence while some states do have good laws to owning a firearm. According to the Center for Injury Research and Prevention, “Approximately one of three handguns guns is kept loaded and unlocked and most children know where their parents keep their guns.” Children and guns should net ever be together, they could accidentally cause a disaster around the house.

Gun violence costs a lot of money, according to Groundswell it costs the United States $229 billion dollars per year. “that’s $55 billion more than Apple’s annual revenue—and Apple is the second-most profitable company in the world.” but also “President Obama in 2014 sent Congress a proposed defense budget of $495.6 billion” Out of the $229 billion dollars per year spent on gun violence, “Gunshot wounds cost $2.8 billion per year in hospital bills, while long-term prison costs for people who commit crimes using guns total $5.2 billion per year. Lost wages and economic contributions from both victims and imprisoned perpetrators amount to an annual cost of $49 billion, and losses in quality of life are estimated to cost $169 billion” (Heinrich).

Pew Research Center has surveyed U.S. adults in what they view of guns and gun ownership. Gun owners have a different view of gun rights in the United States compared to people who don’t own guns (see fig. 1). There are a few reasons that people own firearms, “67% cite protection as a major reason. About four-in-ten gun owners (38%) say hunting is a major reason, and 30% cite sport shooting. Smaller shares cite a gun collection or their job as major reasons” (Igielnik). However according to Gun owners they will usually have their gun close at hand, “About four-in-ten gun owners (38%) say there is a gun that is both loaded and easily accessible to them all of the time when they are at home. And about a quarter of handgun owners (26%) say they carry a gun outside of their home all or most of the time” (Igielnik). However, according to Vox, “Owning a gun or having one readily accessible makes…for increased odds of suicide among persons with access to firearms” and “is true for accidents.” Twenty six percent is a lot, people don’t realize that guns are all over the place wherever they go because according to Center for Injury Research and Prevention, “There are more than 393 million guns in circulation in the United States — approximately 120.5 guns for every 100 people.”

This famous phrase, “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” is “used by gun rights supporters to emphasize the human role in gun violence rather than the gun itself” (Ingraham). However, a gun cannot work unless somebody’s pulls the trigger. It can’t be the guns fault, its whoever does the action of the shootings and killings. Yes, people kill people, but if one can obtain a gun so easily, why haven’t there been stricter gun ownership laws.

There is no doubt that it is even possible to ban all guns in America to prevent more gun deaths, however the government can pitch in and help reduce the amount of gun deaths per year. Such as increasing the legal age to buy a gun. The legal age to buy a gun in the United States is 18 years old, pretty much a high school senior and a big topic about guns is the fear of school shootings. According to the Sanders Institute there should be more restrictions on “access to assault weapons” and “access to high capacity ammunition magazines”. There have been many

stories in the United States where assault weapons are the main cause of mass shootings. Universal background checks should be more strict “While federal laws require licensed gun dealers to perform background checks, federal law does not require unlicensed sellers (like private sellers, and those who sell online and at gun shows) to run background checks.” which can give anybody at any age an easier chance of obtaining a firearm, “A 2017 study estimated that 42% of US gun owners acquired their most recent firearm without a background check.” Without a background check, their history could be filled with bad behaviour and who know what they could do next with their possession of a firearm.

Even though there is no way to ban guns, there are many different ways to reduce gun violence. Accidental gun deaths in the house can be easily prevented by being more responsible by putting a gun in a safer place. Congress can easily help gun violence by, banning assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines, which would reduce the amount killed in mass shootings drastically. People need to realize that the life of a human is very precious. They need to understand how hard it is to lose a loved one because of either an argument or an accident.Now is the time to revise gun violence laws before more innocent people get killed.

Every twenty minutes an American is victim to gun violence ending in death. The current theme of gun control is a very sensitive and controversial topic which is now in the spotlight of discussion. In the wake of recent tragic mass shooting governmental agencies from around the globe need to address this increasing issue of mass shootings and gun violence, enforcing some laws and investing in protecting citizens. This paper will be focusing on the US and why it is important to integrate various laws, concepts in order to try and control gun violence. The US is one of the six countries that contributes to over half of the worlds deaths due to gun violence a year. This is according to an article on “Vox” written by German Lopez, a senior news correspondent and journalist. Compared to the other 5 countries on the list who are all have low-economically institutions and justice systems, US has one of the most stable and prominent governments in the world but is struggling to control the outbreak of gun violence throughout its citizens. I believe stricter handgun control laws, licensing and immigration laws are necessary to saving lives and protecting citizens.

In the USA, shootings are happening so regularly that the government and then in turn, the citizens are numb to the fact that this is becoming a extremely recurring issue that is now apart of our society. News articles now don’t cover a lot of the shootings due to them not being as bad as the previous ones. They only show the massive shootings but the fact is guns are being abused everyday. In the US constitution it states in 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.’ This protects the rights of the citizens to “bear arms” and give them the right to carry and stash guns. The government believed that by passing this law they would prevent shootings and keep criminals as well as mentally ill people from getting guns. However, the statistics show that since this amendment was last reexamined in 1992, gun violence had increased drastically around the world, especially in America.

One of the largest shootings recorded in the United States was the Las vegas shooting that took the lives of 58 people at a music festival, shook the nation.

Even before and after this shooting, multiple people in congress were still fighting to loosen the guns laws, even after many fatalities in this event and many that had already occured.

Straight after the shooting US President Donald Trump said this on twitter sourced from the Atlantic paper “My fellow Americans, we are joined together today in sadness, shock, and grief,” President Trump said from the White House in televised remarks shortly before 11 a.m. “It was an act of pure evil.” However, although his words of good will and prayers were in support for the victims and their families this same type of sympathy didn’t arise when it came to dealing with this increasingly recurring situation as a president in the governmental scene. A blind eye was turned and the focused was solely on the attack itself, not how to move forward and to prevent this from this happening in the future.

Multiple senators also gave their condolences including Richard Blumenthal and Catherine Cortez Masto. However, they were then quickly shot down on social media and by other senators saying that these statements are beating around the bush and not solving the problem of gun violence.

Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, had a strong opinion around gun laws, putting his colleagues in the firing line saying “It is positively infuriating that my colleagues in Congress are so afraid of the gun industry that they pretend there aren’t public policy responses to this epidemic. There are, and the thoughts and prayers of politicians are cruelly hollow if they are paired with continued legislative indifference. It’s time for Congress to get off its ass and do something.”

After this event many democrats failed to tighten up gun laws and background checks. Most of the people in power in the white house, especially the republicans want to loosen gun laws and make it easier for people to get them as a weapon of “self defense”.

One of the powerhouse associations in helping sway the government’s opinion on gun laws is the NRA (national rifle association) who advocate for easier gun laws, using $3 million dollars a year in a bid to influence gun policies, and so far this strategy has worked at keeping the gun laws from becoming more strict. They argue that more guns will make the world safer and want to expand gun rights to “open carry” which means that gun owners will be able to carry weapons, unsealed in most public places.

One instance on where the NRA has had influence on the gun laws is when there was an increase with mass shootings at k-12 schools throughout America, with 24 occuring in 2018 alone. After the biggest shooting happened, with 17 killed at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, there was a massive riot that occured by the victims, families and friends of the deceased that rallied for extremely tighter gun rights, stopping the majority of people from easily buying guns and for the government to change the laws now. However, the NRA got involved, voicing their divergent solution that is in support of the 2nd amendment. The association suggested that instead schools should place highly trained resource officers with guns on the school campus, and teachers should also be armed and trained to carry a gun in order to protect the students in another event such as this one. The government then responded to this opinion, with President Donald Trump tweeting in support of this “reasonable suggestion” saying “Armed educators love students and will protect them. Must be firearms adept and have annual training”

In the hours after it happened, people from all over the world were coming to show support to the victims and their families. Within the next week, Jacinda ardern and the Nz parliament had changed their gun laws to try and prevent this from happening again.

(Most of the people that have committed mass shootings, have then turned the gun on themselves at the end. (could be linked to a mental disorder or sick mind))

Through the previous years of constantly increasing mass shootings and suicides associated with gun violence, the contradicting topic of mental illnesses and psychiatric disorders has been looked upon as the blaming tool for a majority of these incidences linked with gun violence around the world. Multiple court cases where gun violence is involved the assailant will opt for the “insanity plea deal” which argues that the assailant is not to be blamed for the actions of the crime/assassination due to the episodic or psychiatric diseases while it was being committed.

There are various stakeholders that are affected by this theory that mental illness could be to blame for the increase in gun violence in America.

The national Rifle association, which has greater control over the status of firearms rather than the general public, heavily blames the increased gun violence, especially the mass shootings on the untreated mental illnesses and psychiatric disorders of the assailants, rather then the unregulated guns. They also stated in the Journal ‘Annals of epidemiology” written by Jeffrey swanson that they proposed for a national database of persons with mental illnesses. Mental health organisations are now faced with the problem of trying to keep guns out of mental health patients hands, however in the Journal “Annals of epidemiology” pg 367 shows many health board and psychiatric doctors believe that what they saw as the “scapegoating” of people with mental illnesses, the vast majority will never act violent towards others and this is backed with epidemiologic data.

A vast majority of this debate is that public perception states that mental illness and gun violence are both interlocking factors, fueled mainly by the articles and stories in the media. One way this topic is exploited and taken advantage of, is when prosecutors allow to offender to accept the “insanity plea deal” which argues that the assailant is not to be blamed for the actions of the crime/assassination due to the episodic or psychiatric diseases while it was being committed. Because we have to take mental illnesses and psychiatric disorders seriously, many people committing these acts start to play the system and blame their behaviour on “mental problems”.

Many qualified psychiatric doctors however believe that they were completely sane and able to make rational decisions and used the vulnerability of the system to get a lighter sentence. Still, the majority of cases involving the violence of guns are associated with suicide. Suicide is a very sensitive subject especially when linked to such weapons associated with violence. The mental health and wellbeing of a person, most of the time is not treated due to the harsh stigma and embarrassment associated with thoughts around suicide. I believe that protecting citizens from being able to easily purchase and get a hold on guns needs to be a priority. I also believe that this heated conversation on mental illness and gun violence could be a positive reinforcement that this issue needs to be addressed immediately.

Official gun committee, gun manufacturers and the government have a prominent part in influencing the laws surrounding guns and firearms, especially when it comes to exposure of these weapons to the public. I personally don’t believe that these stakeholders are looking at this issue from a birds eye view. Money plays a dominant part in the ideas of losing the gun laws to make them more available to the public. Multiple successful firearm and gun manufacturers such as Smith & Wesson carry a yearly income of $773 million dollars, selling 91.3% of their products to domestic consumers. You would think due to the increase in deaths and mass shootings that gun sales would drop as they would be associated with extreme violence.

However, both the government and gun agencies flip that association around saying that this is why more people need guns so they can protect, fell secure and arm themselves so if anything were to happen they could end it first. This manipulating of reason then showed a spike in firearm purchasing after the Las vegas shootings and many other mass shootings in the recent years. The firearm companies shares went up around 6%- 8%. “The financial times of London” also reported that the sales 52% in the year after the Newtown shooting.

There are multiple assumptions that are associated with this very controversial topic such as that all people who own guns are going to abuse the right, commit a crime of violence. I am not saying that every person who owns are gun is psychotic and is going to abuse the right to a gun, however I am saying that I don’t believe that guns should be that easily accessible to the general public, especially the issue of assault rifles and handguns.

Another assumption is that everyone who committed the crimes of the mass shootings and who shoots people are mentally and have a psychiatric disorder. Although this may be true for some cases, I believe the stigma around mental health is too connected with gun violence, making people assume that is why they did it. However, I believe that most people are mindfully capable of making logical decisions and they do it for a particular gang or cult, control their emotions, put themselves in a powerful position etc.

On concluding this research paper, there are multiple, controversial opinions and positions on the issues around gun violence, around the world but especially in the United states. I believe that throughout there has been various arguments to suggest why implicating stricter handgun control laws, licensing and immigration laws are necessary to saving lives and protecting citizens. I believe it is something that needs to be promptly addressed, as the more numb we as citizens become to the constant news stories, funerals and memorials that are the products of gun violence.

Intro to the issue:

This case study will focus on the issue of gun violence in the US and its complicated nature. The presentation will analyze how human rights play a part in an issue that seems to be less complicated than it is. This is an issue of security on a national level, that ties into the Peace and Conflict and the Human Rights unit. History: (18th century) Gun ownership and guns themselves have been part of American identity and culture since the American revolution. In the earliest years of America, when its constitution was being drafted, there were two main political parties; the federalists and anti-federalists. In relation to guns and security, the federalists believed that the US should have a large collective military, rather than smaller, state-regulated militias, which is what the Anti-federalists wanted. Unsurprisingly, over half of Americans at this time owned guns, in fear of the British tyrannical rule that they had recently overcome through the help of the right to bear arms. So, in 1791 came the creation of the Second Amendment, under the Bill of Rights, drafted by James Madison, who “wanted to create a compromise in order to allow for there to be a balance in power amongst civil society and the government”.

The second amendment reads as follows: Because of the historical context of the Second amendment, and its wording, many have interpreted it in their own way, and some claim that it is outdated, or irrelevant to our society.

Summary of the issue:

Guns are part of American culture. Not only does a third of the American population legally own a gun, but many use them for recreational purposes. Guns, originally created to kill, have been legitimized through the pervasive need for them. Similarly to a ripple, if one member of society obtains a gun, others who feel threatened or unsafe, will also obtain one. Eventually, the prevalence of guns goes from a small community to a national level. So, what is the concern? If a third of the population of a hegemonic state has a gun, what could possibly go wrong? A lot, actually. America’s citizens have the most guns in the world, in comparison to any other country. And this could explain why gun violence has been on the rise. There have been more than 1,600 mass shootings in the US since the infamous Sandy Hook school shooting in 2012 where twenty children and six staff members were shot by a man that I will not name in order to respect the victims. According to the Gun Violence Archive, the frequency of mass shootings has increased, however, the amount of gun violence in the form of homicides has significantly decrease over the past 50 years. This leads me to the point of whether or not gun violence is preventable and an issue that needs legitimate attention.

In a holistic view, gun violence only amounts to less than half of deaths in the US related to guns. In fact, the majority of gun-related deaths in the US are from suicides, not mass shootings or homicides. And although it is cynical approach to looking at this issue, it is important to look at issues like these subjectively, and not use emotion when deciding which issues are most important. Last year, there were 33,636 deaths due to gun violence in the US, but 1.3 million deaths in vehicular accidents. Gun violence is comparable to terrorism, in that it is a serious issue that warrants attention, but is no where near one of the main causes of death in the US, which is important to keep in mind. In an attempt to take a relativist approach, I believe that it is important to understand causes of gun violence.

Although there are many, the main causes are mental illness (insanity), as seen in the Aurora shooting, where a man shot tens of people in a movie theatre, Another reason is to attempt to become famous and gain notoriety, especially in the media, and finally, for personal reasons that often have to do with homicides rather than indiscriminate acts of violence that are often associated with mass shootings. After all of this evidence of gun violence, one would assume that the most logical way to de-escalate the conflict is to ban guns. Except for one document that prohibits this from ever happening; the Second Amendment. This is where human rights play a part in this issue of security. As mentioned earlier, the second amendment has given US citizens the right to bear arms. This is an absolute right in the US, and is as legitimate as every other right that is granted to them. Those who argue that the second amendment should be removed are forgetting the fact that if there is a removal of one right, who is to say that other fundamental rights, such as freedom of speech arent to be taken away? The reality is that the Second Amendment will never be removed. Another human rights issue that relates to the second Amendment is Article 3 in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which the US has signed onto. This article essentially states that everyone has a right to “feel safe”, which is also one of the main roles of the government in any legitimate society. Therefore, there is contradiction between the right to bear arms and the right to feel safe. The questions that arise from this is: Is the government’s role to protect the general public more important than the rights of individual gun owners? and Do the people really have the power when it comes to gun rights and ownership? And the issue of gun control and gun violence is not necessarily a political one. When former President Barrack Obama was leading the country, had the majority of the house and senate, there were still no changes made to the issue. This highlights that gun control is not a democrat vs republican issue. And as seen with Galtung’s conflict theory, contradiction in a society where there is legitimate violence creates conflict that is often impossible to resolve. Currently, the US is in the struggle phase of overcoming this issue.

Analysis of the issue:

It is important to recognize that conflicts this complex are not going to be solved in a short time period, or with a simple solution. I will offer three possible recommendations, along with limitations, that I believe are good ways to transform the conflict into negative peace. The first, most common, likely and realistic recommendation is withdrawal. An example of this would be for those fighting for gun reform to give up. Due to the funding that the NRA gives to high-level politicians, and the previously mentioned legal barriers, it is easiest for to withdraw onesself from the situation. However, the downside to this is that no change is made, and the cycle continues where the mass shooting is forgotten about until another one occurs, and anger is yet again sparked. The second solution is compromise. It is most certainly not likely for the same reasons that the Second Amendment will never be removed. An example of a compromise, would be if ‘assault style weapons’ were banned, such as the AR 15, a semi-automatic rifle used in the most recent school shooting in Parkland, Florida. However, the second amendment challenges this: you either have the right bear arms or you don’t, because deciding which arms are appropriate or not would be impossible since they all have the capacity to kill. With gun violence and gun rights, it’s a zero-sum game; either the positive rights of citizens being allowed to bear arms are respected or the negative rights of the general public to feel safe are respected, both cannot co-exist. And finally, Transcendense which is the ideal outcome, would involve discourse and action following that. For example: ie: increasing security and giving teachers guns in case of a school shooting ie: fortifying background checks and making it more difficult for future owners to obtain guns This way, those who wish to own guns may still do so, it would just be more difficult for them to obtain them. A limitation to this is that it would take a diverse group of legislators to create a document that could be universally applicable to any situation for a gun owner across the country. Neverthless, gun violence and gun control is a domestic issue of security and human rights in the US. And despite its complex nature, civil society must work with the government to overcome the atrocoties that occur because of it.

Sadly, Susan’s story is not uncommon. According to an Associated Press analysis of FBI and Florida data, an average of 760 Americans was killed between 2006 and 2014 with guns by their spouses, ex-spouses, or intimate partners (Foley, par. 6). In 2003, the American Journal of Public Health conducted an eleven-city study to identify the risk factors for women in abusive relationships. According to the study, if the abuser has access to a gun, the victim is five times more likely to be killed (Campbell 1). Susan, the domestic abuse victim, and Frank owned a 0.25 caliber semi-automatic handgun, the murder weapon, as well as several other handguns, a shotgun, and an assault rifle. Victims of domestic violence, like Susan, can be affected by a firearm without the trigger even being pulled. There is also a psychological component to gun uses in an abusive relationship. Although guns were only fired in ten percent of domestic incidents, 69% of the time it was used to intimidate or coerce the intimate partner (Jeltsen, par. 12). The effects of gun violence extend far beyond just domestic abuse cases.

Guns are the cause of numerous deaths in the United States. Every day, one hundred Americans are killed by guns and hundreds more are shot and injured (“Gun Violence in America”). Furthermore, gun violence also effects the millions of Americans who are witnesses, know the victims personally, or live in fear of being shot themselves. Although the right of private ownership of guns is ensured by the Constitution, stricter gun laws need to be implemented to reflect the advanced guns owned today. Since the Second Amendment was ratified in 1791, the reliability, accuracy, range, and affordability of guns have greatly improved. The law should evolve to remain relevant to the objects it is intended to regulate. These stricter regulations would lower gun deaths, including those caused by domestic abuse, suicide, and unintentional injuries as well as help the 71% of people, both gun owners and non-gun owners, who would feel safer when others in their communities acquire firearms (Hemenway 124). Three strategies that have been used to address gun violence will be reflected upon and two more creative solutions will be proposed.

Some have suggested that gun control programs similar to those of Britain, Australia, or Japan should be implemented. However, this strategy is not possible because of the Constitution. In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms independent of lawful purposes, including self-defense within the home. This ruling invalidated extensive gun-control measures like a complete ban on handguns. Yes, this decision can be fixed if the Second Amendment is repealed, but the process for passing this amendment is extremely challenging. Rather than taking on the Constitution directly, an easier route would be to add more liberal-leaning justices on the court to discard the District of Columbia v. Heller precedent.

Another strategy that has been suggested to prevent gun violence is to require a doctor’s note to purchase a gun. Although background checks are supposed to alert sellers of this information, these records are not always reliable or available within the state and federal databases. Countries, such as India, Germany, Japan, Brazil, and Russia, already require some sort of doctor’s note before a person can own a gun. This approach has faced a lot of opposition from physicians. Lack of standards and training as well as concern over divulging private medical information has made physicians reluctant to be the final arbiters of a person’s right to purchase, own, or carry a gun.

Arming teachers is another strategy that has been used to address the problem of gun violence. Although this approach is supported by 45% of adults (Horowitz 1), it is widely criticized by experts, teachers, and school resource officers. Currently, there is no research that proves that arming teachers prevents mass school shootings. Conversely, there is plenty of research that suggests that the present of more guns in our communities leads to an increase in violence. In a school, the potential for accidental gun violence could not only put the children in danger, but also further traumatize them. This approach to ending gun violence, specifically in schools, will likely never be implemented across all of America because schools and teachers across the country have thus far strongly resisted the idea.

Strategies such as repealing the second amendment, requiring doctors’ notes, and arming teachers are messy solutions that might hurt the nation more than they would actually help. The potential benefits of these solutions are weighed down by the potential costs. These ideas would most likely be ineffective or may result in more violence, not less. The solution that leaders might employ to resolve the problem of gun violence is the closing of gaping holes in FBI gun background check system and the lifting of the ban on gun-control research.

Gun violence stands for usage of guns in an attempt to harm someone or cause any sort of casualty intentionally or unintentionally. The discussions with regard to the ownership of firearms and proposals for combating gun violence have been largely controversial and have amassed divided public opinions as well as conflicting constitutional claims. In an attempt to tackle this problem, conflicting interpretations of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (“the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”) should be taken into account.

There are nearly 200 million guns in private hands as a part of recreation (hunting and target shooting) but are now being used against people during commission or defense against crime. Advocates for firearm possession consider them an important source of protection while control advocates condemn them for the damage they do in the hands of criminals. The data collected from various research surveys illustrate the scale of the problem. According to a research by Politifact there have been 1,516,863 gun-related deaths on US soil since 1968 until 2015, compared with the 1,396,733 war deaths that include revolutionary war, The Mexican war, the civil war(Union and Confederate), the Spanish-American war, the first world war, the second world war, the Korean war, the Vietnam war, the Gulf war, the Afghanistan war, the Iraq war along with other conflicts in other countries including Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, Somalia and Haiti. Out of the 33,000 gun violence deaths that take place each year, about 500 (1.5%) are a result of mass shootings. Suicides cause two-third deaths. [1] [2] [3] [4].

As per the data validated until 19th of February, 2018, for the year 2018 there have been 7,168 incidents related to gun violence out of which 1,984 have caused deaths whereas 3,434 have caused fatal injuries. Out of these, 34 of them have been cases of mass violence which has seen an upward trend over the years. [5] Currently, the right to keep and bear arms in the United States is protected by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which has remained to be largely debatable by various sections of the crowd. The people eligible to possess and own firearms within the United States (with further restrictions) include ‘US citizens, permanent resident aliens and non-immigrant aliens admitted into the United States for lawful hunting or sporting purposes or if the non-immigrant falls under one of the following exceptions : possesses a valid hunting license/permit issued by any US state, official representative of a foreign government who is accredited to the United States Government or the Government’s mission to an international organization having its headquarters in the US or is enroute to or from another country to which that alien is accredited, official of a foreign government or a distinguished foreign visitor who has been so designated by the Department of State, a foreign law enforcement officer of a friendly foreign government entering the United States on official law enforcement business or someone who has received a waiver from the Attorney General as long as the petition shows this would be in the interests of justice and would not jeopardize the public safety under 18 U.S. Code § 922(y)(3)(c).” [6]

The firearms market is constituted of two types of markets, namely primary and secondary. The primary market involves acquisition of new and secondhand firearms from federal firearms licensees. FFLs require customers to provide identification and sign a form that validates the fact that they aren’t prohibited from buying a firearm along with conducting a proper criminal background check on the customers. A privately owned gun can be transferred in ways not involving FFLs through classified ads and at gun shows. This constitutes the secondary market for firearms. Young offenders have been noted as active in illegal market both as buyers and sellers of guns through their networks of friends, family and street sources. These guns also have high value in exchange and are used by the youth to trade for money, drugs or other items like video games, phones etc.

The vast majority of Americans support gun control and yet the Congress has failed to toughen laws even in the wake of a series of mass shootings, the primary reason for this being National Rifles Association (NRA) pouring money into political races at record levels for gun lobbying. It has spent US$4.1 million on lobbying in 2018- as compared to US$3.1 million it spent in 2016. [7] Along with lobbying, the Supreme Court’s Citizens United’s decision allowing NRA to be open for independent expenditures has enabled groups and individuals to back or attack candidates. A lot of the organization’s strength also stems from the support of the voters and its ability to push an agenda that appears out of line with the general demographic, which is in favor of stricter gun laws.

The staggering figures collected from various researches portray the magnitude of the problem that lies. [8] America leads other developed countries when it comes to gun-related homicides by a huge margin because it has way more guns than other developed nations (29.7, homicides by firearm per 1 million people). America has 4.4 percent of the world’s population but almost half of the civilian- owned guns around the world. There have also been more than 1,500 mass shootings on American soil since Sandy Hook, which was a mass shooting that took place in December 2012, when a gunman walked into the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut and killed 20 children, 6 adults and himself. Supporters of gun rights often cite that it’s inappropriate to bring up political debates about gun control in the aftermath of a tragedy but the statistics which show that America has nearly one mass shooting a day proves that if the lawmakers are forced to wait for a time when there isn’t a mass shooting to talk about gun control, they could find themselves waiting for a long time. Moreover, the old conventional wisdom, that talks about America having more crime than other Western countries are vanquished as US appears to have more lethal violence primarily driven by the prevalence of guns. The need for stricter gun control laws is further realized by the fact that stricter laws in a few states have led to a significant drop in gun violence. With most of the gun deaths being suicides, this has become one of the most compelling reasons for stricter gun control policies. It has also been found that programs that limit access to guns have decreased suicides. However, support for gun ownership has sharply increased since the early ‘90s and mass shootings seem to have little effect on public’s opinion about gun rights.

Attention must be paid towards the favorite arguments that are used by gun lobbyists which can be easily invalidated through a number of research studies. It has been widely said that guns don’t kill people but people kill people but the crux of the matter is that people with access to more guns tend to kill more people- with guns. States with higher gun ownership rates have higher gun murder rates- as much as 114 percent higher than states with lower gun ownership rates. It is also widely reported that an armed society is a polite society however, various studies suggest that being armed increases your chances of getting into a confrontation. Moreover, what is also taken as an argument by lobbyists is the fact that more good guys with guns can stop the bad guys, however the number of mass shootings that have been stopped by armed civilians in the past 33 years is 0, clearly invalidating their argument. One of the primary reasons for firearms possession being safety at home is invalidated as well with research studies suggesting gun ownership leads to higher risks of homicides, suicides and accidental deaths by guns. Moreover in 2013, more than 5 times more women were shot by husbands, boyfriends and ex-partners than murdered by male strangers completely contradicting the argument that guns make women safer. What is widely popularized by these lobbyists is the fact that no more gun laws are needed but only the ones that exist need to be enforced properly, however weak laws and loopholes backed by lobby has enabled people to get guns easily and the existing laws aren’t preventing guns from getting into the wrong hands. [9]

There are plenty of reasons that can be cited as root causes for the excessive gun violence in the United States. Gun rights have been established in the US constitution itself, in the Bill of Rights passed immediately after ratification. These laws are covered in the Second Amendment, which is only secondary to laws guaranteeing freedom of expression. Mental Illness is cited as one of the primary reasons for gun violence, which at the first glance seems plausible but researches and statistics prove otherwise. People with severe mental illnesses (schizophrenia and bipolar disorder) do have an increased risk of violence as compared to the general population but the absolute risk they pose is not high, and vast majority of people with mental illnesses aren’t violent. Mentally ill people, on the other hand, are far more likely to be the victims of gun violence. Moreover, only a distinct minority of the population suffers from severe mental illnesses, which contributes not much at all to the overall problem. Although, it must be added here that while mental health isn’t the key to the gun homicide problem, better mental health treatment and gun control can be effective in combating the problem. Only about 4 percent of violence acts committed against other people is caused by serious mental illnesses. Substance abuse has been another popular theory, but its involvement in the gun problem has been largely debatable. Drug violence by drug cartels and their subordinates, can be prevented by legalizing drugs, with an example being Colorado witnessing a significant drop in crime rates, particularly a 24 percent reduction in homicides after the legalization of recreational marijuana. Alcohol misuse, dependence and addiction are also risk factors. As a part of a study in New Zealand, it was found out that alcohol dependence might have a ‘casual association’ with about 10 percent of the impulsive crimes including assault, which can hold true for disputes that turn deadly due to proximity to firearms. Video games have been cited as to have spurred gun violence, with all these arguments against them being proved baseless by numerous researches and statistics data. United States is separated out when we look at how much a country spends on games and how many gun deaths there are relative to the country’s population. Generally the countries with most deaths from gun violence aren’t the ones spending the most on video games; United States is an outlier in that regard, given the high number of gun deaths. Japan is a great example of how baseless the claims are, with Japan being a country of 127 million and with rarely more than 10 gun deaths total per year. Violent video games don’t kill people but lax laws that make dangerous firearms too easily accessible kill people. Of the 200 countries with the highest rates of deaths from gun violence and 100 countries that spend the most per capita in video games, only the United States is in the upper quintile on both the metrics. Although there have been instances where a shooter may have specifically acted because games ‘shaped his thoughts’. [10][11]

Before the various solutions for this problem are proposed and discussed, it’s important to know what people think of the problem, the gun control measures and gun ownership issues. Three-in-ten American adults say they own a gun. White adults are more likely than blacks or Hispanics to own guns, and white men are particularly likely to be gun owners. There is vast urban-rural divide in gun ownership rates. 46 percent adults who live in rural areas said that they own a gun as compared to the 28 percent from suburbs and just 19 percent from urban areas. Gun ownership is also linked with party affiliation, with 44 percent of Republicans and independents saying they own a gun as compared to 20 percent of Democrats and Democratic leaners saying the same. Amongst the reasons cited for gun ownership, protection constitutes for a massive 67 percent thereby becoming one of the primary reasons for ownership. About four-in-ten gun owners (38%) say hunting is a major reason, while 30% cite sport shooting. Smaller shares cite gun collection or their job as major reasons. Majorities of gun owners who live in cities, suburbs and rural areas cited protection as a major reason for firearm ownership whereas owners living in rural areas have cited hunting as a major reason. Men are more likely than women to say hunting and sport shooting are central to why they own a gun. Two-thirds of gun owners say that they own more than one firearm and roughly three-in-ten say that they personally have five or more guns. About four-in-ten gun owners (38%) say that there is a gun that is both loaded and easily accessible to them all of the time when they are home. About a quarter of handgun owners (26%) say that they carry a gun outside of their home all or most of the time. For most gun owners, owning a firearm is tied to their sense of personal freedom, with three-quarters of gun owners (74%) saying the right is essential. Gun owners and non-owners disagree on many policy proposals, and among gun owners, Republicans and Democrats don’t see eye to eye. Owners and non-owners are sharply divided when it comes to creating a federal database to track gun sales, banning assault-style weapons, and banning high capacity magazines, with the support for these proposals being much higher among non-gun owners and a significant share of owners being open to these proposals. Great majorities of both gun owners and non-owners favor limiting access to guns for people with mental illnesses and individuals who are on federal no-fly or terrorist watch lists, and strong majorities favor background checks for private sales and at gun shows. Republican gun owners are more resistant than Democratic owners to banning assault-style weapons and high-capacity magazines as well as creating a database to track gun sales whereas they are more open than Democrats to proposals that would expand gun rights, such as allowing people to carry concealed guns in more places and allowing teachers and officials to carry guns in K-12 schools. About one-in-five gun owners (19%) say they belong to the NRA with Republicans and Republican-leaning gun owners twice more likely than Democratic and Democratic-leaning gun owners to say they belong to NRA. The public opinion on NRA’s influence over gun legislation is divided, with 40 percent saying it’s the right amount of influence, 15 percent saying it has too little influence. While six-in-ten non-gun owners (59%) see gun violence as a huge problem, only a third of adults who own guns say the same. Among all adults, 86 percent say the ease with which people can illegally obtain guns contributes a great deal to gun violence. 60 percent point to the ease with which people can legally obtain guns (Two-thirds of non-gun owners compared to fewer than half of gun owners). [12]

Pro-gun activists frequently use a quote made by Mahatma Gandhi to suggest that Gandhi supported individual gun ownership which goes as follows: “Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.” In this passage Gandhi references India’s Arms Act (1878) which gave Europeans right to carry firearms and prevented Indians from doing so, unless they were granted a license by British colonial government. The full text of his quote goes like: “Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest. If we want the Arms Act to be repealed, if we want to learn the use of arms, here is a golden opportunity. If the middle classes render voluntary help to Government in the hour of its trial, distrust will disappear, and the ban on possessing arms will be withdrawn.” Gandhi wanted Indians to fight in World War I to prove themselves trustworthy with arms and fit for citizenship, and claiming that he was pro-gun ownership is an oversimplification of his views. However, he did not oppose the use of violence in some circumstances, preferring it to cowardice and submission, he still remained a staunch advocate for nonviolence his entire life. Gandhi’s absolute refusal to use firearms and his quote during his work with the ambulance corps in England in 1914 which says “A rifle this hand will never fire” serve as powerful evidences refuting the claims made by the pro-gun activists. In fact after the replacement of the old Arms Act of 1878 with the 1959 Arms Act and the supplemental Arms Rules of 1962, he didn’t speak out against the Arms Act of 1858 again as he didn’t consider it significant enough to advocate against and remained adamant about establishing nonviolence as a principle of state policy.