Category: Gun Control

About 393 million people in the US own a gun that’s 46% of people worldwide which makes us the most armed country in the world. One gun can be made without a single problem but that one gun can also kill thousands with no hesitation. Gun violence has impacted our society in such a bad way which is why it needs to be stopped. Gun violence is bad because because hundreds of people can die with guns and that’s only firearms because there is a lot more ways to kill people.gun violence has had a big impact on our society. The only reasonable way to decrease gun violence is not to take their guns away from them but to not let people with mental health issues get a hold of them or have better background checks.

Gun violence one of the most common problems in the U.S not only common but extremely horrifying, but as scary as they are the way they start is almost as scary. The way guns are just handed out to anyone these days is crazy literally a kid can get in touch of one but it’s no surprise for the U.S because ”We have by far the most handguns – and the weakest gun laws – of any high-income country’ (Laura, 2020). This proves how its not only the people that own the guns that create or start gun violence but the guns themselves being there in the first place to create a thought in them to start something like that. This also shows us how laws really don’t matter in this country when it comes to guns even though they complain how bad of a problem this is, but still no one really does anything about it when it comes to laws for firearms. Even if someone did try to do something about it “The right to own firearms is protected by the Second Amendment to the Constitution”, so you really cant stop someone from owning one, but this law was written years ago we are in a new age 2020 everything is so much different not everyone today supports this idea which is why something needs to be done about it.

Something that we can do about this problem without taking guns away which we really should, but it’s not possible because of the second amendment which we can’t change. But what we can do is reduce the amount of guns that are given out to people by giving requirements like background checks to obtain a gun and not just get one out of just nowhere. For example when the mass shooting happened by the ”Twenty-one year-old Patrick Crusius who bought the AK-47-style assault rifle he used to kill twenty-two people at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, on August 3 on the Internet, without a background check” (Sharon, 2019).This shows how extremely easy it is for anyone to obtain a gun without having a background check without single person finding out or even caring what the consequences are for this. This also shows how the second amendment is still a big problems because it lets people own a gun and sell it online without a background check in the black market.

Some may say that guns are not the problem, it’s the people that own the guns that create the problem. Those who support the idea may refer to the idea that states that most shootings happen because of mental health or illness people think of this because most shootings have happened mostly because of mentally ill people but if that person didn’t have a gun in the first place an incident like death wouldn’t occur. About “twenty two percent of U.S. gun owners who acquired their most recent firearm within the previous two years did so without a background check” (Johnson, 2019); this shows how easy it is for someone like that with mental health issues get a hold of a gun and that’s where gun violence starts.

Gun violence has had a big impact on our society, but the only way to get rid of or try and decrease gun violence might not be taking guns away but not let people with mental health problems get a hold of him. Letting people like them with mental health issues or anyone without a background check this is what creates gun violence and ruins the society we live in today. Also not getting a gun for protection purposes really makes the whole point of owning a gun for protection sound dumb this again makes the second amendemnet of constitution look like its useless. All though guns can help you defend yourself against danger it’s not so smart for them to be giving them out like flyers on the streets.

The controversial issue of gun control has been the epicenter of discussion for the past decade. As a result of recurring mass shootings that have ended with tragedy and grief, gun violence has divided society into a heated debate to determine the best solution for gun control. On one hand, many individuals believe that restrictions must be enforced on guns. The opposing hand consists of people who do not think that regulating guns is the most favorable act. These individuals mainly consider gun control won’t be the solution to the obstacles and difficulties that guns create like homicides and mass shootings.

I believe that the right to control guns is an effective deterrent. People who abide by the law should have the right to own a gun in cases of self defense. The restrictions that have been placed on firearms and guns will not alter the beliefs of criminals from possessing weapons. In other words, regardless of laws and regulations that are passed which minimize gun usage, criminals will still continue to lash out events of homicide shootings. This is due to the fact that laws do not prevent criminals from performing illegal acts which is what labels people as criminals. These sort of people have intentions to disobey the law and regulations that are placed against gun violence. Since criminals disregard the laws of supply and demand, gun control will not find success and effectiveness. We, as a society must search for other solutions which would prevent the tragedy that criminals perform in public events with their guns. The subject of gun violence will not be solved by gun control nor gun rights since this issue is caused by criminals, the disobedience of laws, and mental illnesses.

To be blunt, people should understand that mass shootings that are conducted by criminals deal with the supply of illegal guns. Criminals find numerous ways of purchasing and obtaining weapons. The black market is one of the illegal examples. There is an extreme amount of money that flows through the black market. Unfortunately, many people who are in the black market only care about their profit from their illegal firearms and have no regard to who they are selling their firearms too. Since this is illegal, it is almost certain that these firearms are going into the hands of criminals. This shows that criminals have numerous ways of obtaining a gun as long as they have the connections and money to purchase one. If a criminals main priority is to buy a gun, there is nothing that would be able to stop them from acquiring one which is an extremely scary situation.

Society needs to understand that firearms are a criminal’s best friend. Due to the fact that criminals have already exhibited illegal acts, guns act as a line of security for a criminal. They are able to utilize their guns to protect themselves from their views of harm and danger. Regulating guns in order to reduce gun shootings will only end in suffrage as civilians who follow the law will be under heavy restrictions while criminals and gangs will most likely be the people who have possessions of firearms, due to the black market.

There has never been a shortage of violence in society for as long as humans have existed. It predates back to a time even before civilization with some religion such as Christianity having recorded incidents. The bible has several documented historical passages depicting a cycle of violence towards one another for various reasons. Millenniums later the situation has not changed as we are still killing each other. It would be right to say that the society we live in has become more dangerous than ever before. The result is due to access to more dangerous weapons such as guns compared to spears and arrows. Guns are very lethal and should be handled with great care to prevent accidental or intentional misuse.

American society is plagued by gun-related violence daily as evident by all the media reports of police and mass shootings in the streets. These shootings have become too frequent to ignore and turn a blind eye to as they are on the rise in some cities such as Chicago and Los Angeles where crime seems to thrive. It has caused the community to form movements such as ‘Black lives matters’, where some folks of the African-American community feel that the shootings are racially charged. There have been cases where race may have played a part in the events leading to a suspect’s death, but that’s not always the case. Police officers have also been a target of these crimes of violence as they try to perform their duties as officers of the law to protect the public. Whether committed by criminals or police, one thing is sure; we as a society need to get the situation under control before it runs the nation to the ground.

The documentary ‘Hard-Wire: Law of The Gun’ was released in February 2016, when police shootings were happening all over the country. Although some shots may have been justified, some of them raise cause for concern. Statistics showed that at least one in every ten suspects gunned down, he/she was unarmed. This information could not have been revealed at a better time as it coincided with the demonstrations that called for justice for those victims. It gave substance to the cases made by swinging the public opinion of how the police used lethal force unnecessarily. Such documentations are very instrumental in swaying the public and raising awareness. They show detailed chronological order of even such as a suspect being shot in the back while running from the police. Reports later revealed that the suspect had a weapon in which he opened fire on the police despite the evidence suggesting otherwise. Whether then or now, shooting is a sensitive matter that needs to be handled in a delicate manner lest it causes unrest in the community.

The case of Officer Hernandez, who shot a suspect in the back, which is against all protocol, is viewed as a denial for justice by the family of the deceased when he is not charged. The other perspective through which the case is the angle is that it was a racially charged crime against the black community. The filming crew follows an officer around to see how they operate and try to learn the events that can lead to shooting by the police. He is constantly afraid and worries that he might not make it back to his family at the end of the day, as is every other officer out there. The truth of the matter is such thoughts can cloud your judgment and make one paranoid of his surroundings. A suspect caught running in the middle of the road by a dashboard camera is shot after the officer spots an item which he claims was a knife. He is later seen shooting the suspect to death even after he hits the ground and is not a threat anymore. Shootings, where such strong evidence is presented, leads us to think whether there was more to it than meets the eye.

Meanwhile, in countries such as Scotland, cases of a police shooting are sporadic. The police force on that side of the world believes in the preservation of all lives and only results in shooting as a last resort. The video shows how the handle suspects in different situations with different weapons such as knives and flammable liquids. They explain that the key to handling a situation better is by talking down the suspect to help deescalate.

While in the United States, it may be a little difficult to deescalate some situation, statistics show that one in every five suspects gunned down has a history of mental illness. When an officer is not well equipped to recognize the symptoms of diseases such as schizophrenia, they may be forced to use lethal force unnecessarily. The crew follows the officers responding to a complaint by the neighbors threatening to harm them. When they arrive, they try to talk him down but to no avail, which causes them to fall back and come up with a new plan of action. They later gain entrance after successively convincing the suspect to put down the machete he was holding and manage to bring him without firing a single shot. The de-escalation technique may not be efficient in every situation, but it should be the first option when dealing with a suspect.

In conclusion, we are all human and as such flawed by design. Therefore, when faced with stressful situations, we act based on instincts and self-preservation. We can sometimes see one thing but due to adrenaline and other factors end up relating it to another. For instance, when a suspect in a crime-infested neighborhood tries to reach for a phone in his/her pocket without the authorization of the office, he/she may result in excessive force such as shooting. Nonetheless, society is doomed unless they tackle gun violence head-on before it’s too late.

The United States’ presidential elections have held much weight in recent years, especially with a new competitor entering the scene with no prior experience in political matters: Donald Trump. With Trump representing the Republican Party and the Democrats backing Hillary Clinton, the 2016 election was one of much suspense and surprise with the newcomer, Trump, taking the nation by storm and bringing home the election for the Republican Party. However, a daunting truth has loomed over the United States even before Trump’s presidency, but has spiked in recent years: the obscene number of firearm murders in the United States.

For being the 13th most developed country in the world (2018) according to the United Nation’s Human Development Index, the US has an astoundingly large number of murders by guns. And with Trump’s booming patriotism and Second Amendment-supporting policies, mass murders are not being hindered by any means and the thought of them is tossed aside with a sorrowful tweet. Stricter gun control policies are rapidly becoming necessary for the safety of all United States citizens and the president elected in 2020 should be one who supports an abolishment of these weapons, crafted for war, being used to slaughter innocent people.

Gun violence plagues nearly all parts of the United States, from poverty-stricken communities to pristine, wealthy neighborhoods. The massive circulation of firearms within the US and government-created impoverished areas has led to the creation of the cultural and geographical phenomenon known as ghettos. These areas, especially, are known for high levels of gun violence and a lack of proper regulation of the weapons being bought and sold like food. The government has done little to try and provide aid to those who live in ghettos, despite the areas being formed due to racial discrimination in the form of redlining by the government. With few public services and a constant need to thieve, these areas become a cesspool of violence and firearms flow in as the apparent need for them increases. While those who own guns in ghettos are not necessarily looking to commit mass murders with their weapons, “[They] are young men who because they are armed feel less inclined to avoid confrontations that could escalate into bloodshed” as Geoffrey Canada puts in in his memoir ‘Fist, Stick, Knife, Gun’.

In the aforementioned memoir by Geoffrey Canada, he discusses life growing up in the ghettos of the United States, specifically the Bronx in New York City. Canada writes that “when I was growing up, in the 1950s, ’60s, and even ’70s, we never had so many guns in our inner cities. The nature of the violent act has changed over these decades from the fist, stick, and knife to the gun”. These pockets of poverty and violence should be addressed more directly by our president as they affect a large portion of the US population and have been hubs of crime for decades, largely due to their easy access to firearms.

On the other end of the spectrum, gun violence is still highly prevalent in wealthy or at least well-off communities which appear, on a surface level, relatively secure. Just last year, 2018, a mass shooting occurred at Santa Fe High School in Santa Fe, Texas leaving 10 dead and 13 others wounded. Such an act of violence was highly unprecedented as Santa Fe ISD and its surrounding areas including our very school district, Clear Creek ISD, are not notorious for violent crime. Such an atrocity brought to light, just as copious other shootings have, that such easy access to weapons designed for malicious intent is a blatantly defective system in regards to maintaining the safety of citizens. Yet the response by our president, a leader meant to make every individual citizen feel protected, was to provide his condolences and have flags at half-staff.

It cannot be that the leader of our country, one leading the world in technology, a hub of trade and commerce, a beacon of freedom for the world with the Statue of Liberty standing proudly every day, simply refuses to concede not the right to bear arms, but the right to bear arms which are blatantly weapons of war, crafted for a battlefield, not self-defense nor hunting. However, it is not necessary that those who have perished due to gun violence have their deaths be in vain. The new generation of the United States can make a difference not only for themselves, but for the older and younger generations. The safety of millions lies in the hands of the voters at the 2020 election, and the decision must be made by each and every one of them whether they value their right to bear arms more than their security and that of their fellow citizens.

Gun violence tends to happen in every country but recently it has been occurring more frequently in the United States. No other country has even half the number of gun deaths as the United States and none come close to half of the number of firearms that circulate and flow within our boarders yet there seems to be no urgent emergency in trying to stop this national threat. We need to make a change and fast because according to the American public health association, “Every day, 100 Americans are killed with guns and hundreds more are shot and injured. The effects of gun violence extend far beyond these casualties—gun violence shapes the lives of millions of Americans who witness it, know someone who was shot, or live in fear of the next shooting”. Yet the people that are against gun control choose to believe that their second amendment right is way more important than the lives that are lost. I ask myself where is the empathy? Why can’t they see all the harm that is done to not only those that were directly affected but to the people around them such as family and friends. They are not going to be able to go back and live their lives before they lost someone to gun violence. I believe that having stricter gun laws will be able to solve such heinous acts from occurring because having better background checks, red flag laws, and the banning of assault rifles will be the key components in stopping gun violence.

For starters, we need to realize that gun violence is not unavoidable but one of the main reasons why gun violence is so high is because there is easy access to firearms. One way we can put an end to that is by having better background checks which will now be taken more serious due to the Fix NICS (National Instant Criminal Background Check System) act of 2017. As stated by Beth Baumann, “this act makes it mandatory for all federal agencies to report criminal convictions to the Attorney General, so that those convictions are put into the background check system”. The Fix NICS act makes the background check more accurate since the system will be updated twice a year allowing for fewer mistakes from happening. According to Daphne Marvel, “this aims to prevent what happened at Sutherland Springs, Texas in which the failure of not conducting a proper background check leads to a shooting at a church in which 26 people were murdered”. If the background check would have been up to date it would have shown the domestic violence case in his records which would have prevented him from getting a gun.

Furthermore, I believe another great method to prevent gun violence would be the California policy of Gun Violence Restraining Order (GVRO), which is also known as the red flag law. The law was signed in 2014 and went into effect on January 2016. The reason why the red flag law would make a great impact on preventing gun violence is that it allows the police or family members to petition a court to recover someone’s guns, magazines, and ammunition in emergencies for up to three weeks, though a judge can extend the confiscation up to a year. The red flag seems to be effective since Tara Law from the LA Times states that “21 cases of the mass shooting were prevented because of the red flag law. One, in particular, spoke about a car dealership employee who had told a co-worker he was going to shoot his supervisors and other employees if they were to fire him so the co-worker notified the police and with a judge’s permission the police were able to confiscate four weapons and one other gun”. This is a great example of how gun violence was prevented. This law also focuses on people that are possibly at the highest risk of harming themselves or others which I believe is such a great thing because suicide alone makes up overall two-thirds of gun deaths.

Lastly, I’ll like to discuss the various ways of how the banning of assault rifles would prevent further gun violence. But before we get into that I’ll like to go over how 25 years ago there was already an assault rifle ban (1994), which didn’t allow the manufacturing or sale of semi-automatic weapons or magazines that could hold ten rounds or more to civilians. Sadly, the bill had to be renewed every 10 years but because at the time of the renewal the house and senate were mostly made up of Republicans, who were against the bill it wasn’t able to pass for renewal. But while the bill was in effect it was able to reduce the number of mass shootings. Which leads me to my point of why we need an assault rifle ban. Nowadays there’s a mass shooting every now and then but if they were to reintroduce the assault rifle ban (1994) it will help decrease mass shootings because past shooters prefer to use an assault rifle since it is able to hold 30 bullets in a magazine, the ammunition travels three times the speed of sound, and because of the high velocity the bullet goes and gun powder it contains it tends to explode once it makes contact with something. So, if this ban were to pass it would make it harder for people in general to have access to these dangerous weapons and according to Joe Biden who articulated the 1994 ban states, “Assault weapons — military-style firearms designed to fire rapidly — are a threat to our national security, and we should treat them as such, anyone who pretends there’s nothing we can do is lying — and holding that view should be disqualifying for anyone seeking to lead our country”. This statement reinforces why assault rifles should be banned especially when this year alone there has been so many mass shootings.

Conclusion

In conclusion, I believe that having stricter gun laws will be able to stop gun violence from occurring because having better background checks, red flag laws, and the banning of assault rifles will be the key components in stopping gun violence. The reason for that is because these restrictions make people do everything legally. There would be fewer weapons on the streets that are being sold illegally which would prevent people from buying them and using them to hurt themselves or others. Even though many people who are against gun control will disagree with my following statements either because they say it violates their second amendment or because they say it gives too much power to the government. They should be considerate and try to at least understand that this isn’t a personal attack towards them, but instead an attack towards gun violence.

Gun violence has become a larger area of interest for citizens of the United States. Gun violence has changed in many different ways since the 1700s. In 1791 the U.S. Constitution was put into place which included laws about guns and gun violence. The Constitution states, “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 means that anyone who is a citizen of the U.S has the right to access guns. This paper will review gun laws in relation to the United States and the changes which have been made and why concerning mass massacres.

Starting in 1934 the National Firearms Act (NFA) was set into place. The NFA ruled that there would be a tax on the making and transfer of firearms. This law required registration of firearms with the Secretary of the Treasury (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives). The law also required firearms to be more regulated based on the size and shape of the gun. The transformation of these regulations meant a lot for the Nation as a whole. No longer were guns going to be non-regulated. This law made the concern for safety less of a problem.

With the new law set in place, policymakers could hope for a better and safer future after crimes of the era, such as the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre. This widely known massacre happened during the late 1920s. Al Capone (facilitator) sought to consolidate control by eliminating his rivals in the illegal trades of bootlegging, gambling and prostitution.

Four years later in 1938, another law was set in place called the Federal Firearms Act (FFA). Franklin D. Roosevelt saw a need for the federal government to help out with the trafficking of guns. The law requires gun manufactures, importers and dealers to obtain a federal firearms license. The new law also made it so convicted felons would not be able to purchase guns. With this new law, citizens could imply that with the new law set in place, they were in a better position for safety.

Thirty years have passed and President at the time Lyndon B. Johnson pushed for another passage to be added to the Constitution. He would call this the Gun Control Act of 1968. This new transformation would include language about destructive devices such as bombs, mines and grenades. They also expanded the definition of a machine gun. After three decades of unclarity, citizens were finally starting to get a sense of the Gun Laws and how they are impacting their lives.

The Gun Control Act of 1968 as well had other implications regarding safety and the use and ownership of guns. The bill as well-made age limits for the purchase of handguns, now owners would have to be at least 21 years of age. The new bill also prohibited felons, mentally ill people, and others from purchasing guns. The transition of gun violence from the 1930’s-1960’s has changed which as well caused the need for updates within the law. There are currently said to be two different trends in America regarding gun violence. Mass shootings that happened between the 1930s-1960s were mostly familicides and felony related killings. Fast forward to present day, most mass shootings are now in public places against unknown bystanders. From the years 2000-2010 alone, there were 84 active shooter situations in the United States.

The increased number of shootings within the past decades leading up to the 2000s without a doubt raises questions as to what is to come next. As a college student nearing the year 2020, I think a lot of things have changed. The significance as well as reasoning for the mass shootings have different purposes. The St. Valentine’s Day Massacre happened because Al Capone wanted to eliminate his northside rivals. Another famous massacre that happened in the United States was the 1999 Columbine school shooting. It was speculated that the perpetrators Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold purposely chose athletes, minorities and Christians as their victims. Though these massacres are different, they were historic and changed the laws regarding guns.

The Gun Control Act of 1968 should have made it so an event like Columbine School Shooting didn’t happen. The bill banned importing guns that have “no shooting purpose,” imposed age restrictions for the purchase of handguns (gun owners had to be 21), prohibited felons, the mentally ill, and others from purchasing guns, required that all manufactured or imported guns have a serial number. Even though this law is in place, the two students at Columbine had guns. Eric Harris (18) and Dylan Klebold (17) found a loophole and asked a friend to buy them guns after they were turned down when trying to purchase them. Mark Manes, the man who sold a gun to Harris and bought him 100 rounds of ammunition the day before the murders, was sentenced to six years in prison.

In 2001, George W. Bush signed the act called Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. This act prevented the gun manufacturers from being named in federal or state civil suits by those who were victims of crimes involving guns made by that company. Instead of suing the gun manufactures, however the parents of the victims of the Columbine school shooting sued Manes and Philip Duran. They won $900,000 in settlements with the two men that provided Harris and Klebold with the gun used in the massacre. The addition of the new act may have been because the gun used, TEC-DC9, which is the focus of the wrongful death claim. These types of guns can no longer be made in the United States.

A more recent school shooting that took place was the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary school shooting. Though the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was in place, the families of the victims sued the Remington Arms Company for being the maker and producer of the AR-15 style rifle that was used in the shooting. The Connecticut supreme court blocked Remington’s bid to block the lawsuit. They ruled that the families of the victims of Sandy Hook school shooting can sue Remington for marketing military-style weapons to civilians. According to the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act that shouldn’t have happened. Remington says the case “presents a nationally important question” about U.S. gun laws – namely, how to interpret the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which grants broad immunity to gun makers and dealers from prosecution over crimes committed with their products. Some people argue that the gun companies shouldn’t be sued, because the gun didn’t kill the person, the person killed the person.

According to the Gun Violence Archives, there has been 395 mass shootings this year. There has only been 342 days in the year so far. With less than a month left, 2019 already has the highest number of mass shootings in any year since 2014. With gun violence and mass massacres on the rise, there should be a new bill imposed so that the laws can fit in with the new society.

This essay touched based on some of the gun laws that are in the United States. Gun laws have changed tremendously since the 1791 U.S. Constitution. Some of the gun laws included are the National Firearms Act, Federal Firearms Act, Gun Control Act of 1968, and the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. It is important to remember some of the reasons why these laws were made such as the Valentine’s day massacre, the Columbine school shooting and the Sandy Hook Elementary school shooting. As a nation, we have faced many horrific mass massacres. Since gun violence is on a rise, we also have to unite as a country and realize that we need to keep everyone safe.

Gun violence is one of America’s major situations that nowadays seems as a new normal occurring in society. Digital technology experts are trying to reduce the situation with the advancement of technology. Prevention of these incidents should be our main priority for our safety and our lives. Advanced technology such as Gun detection could help improve the prevention of shootings in a more accurate representation and help the public become safe again. “Digital technology specialists argue if they should use their expertise on trying to lower the gun violence rates or how advancing their technology could increase background checks and make the process of purchasing a firearm more extreme”. Also, looking at other countries such as Canada, where they have technological developed control against gun violence by Integrated Ballistic Identification System or IBIS linking bullet casing to the firearm influencing the United States to develop their own ‘smart-gun’ as an attempt on also preventing any further mass shootings from occurring.

It’s arguable that technology has had a great impact on society, but could experts actually use it’s advancement to reduce the increase of social issues like gun violence from happening. Research of an article ‘Technology Can Reduce Gun Violence’, which elaborates on technology’s role in preventing gun violence and establishes ways that the advancement can help reduce the amount of violence from firearms. A report from The New York Times discusses the increase of violent mass shootings that have happened recently. A man named Nicholas Kristof, a columnist who wrote an impassioned call for gun safety and gun control, included recounts of gun-related statistics estimating the amount of violence caused by guns. Silicon Valley has stated being the ‘Web 2.0 movement’ since 2015 and has been taking the matter of the situation very serious. They have begun on developing ‘smart guns’ to help save lives and support gun control with advanced technology on preventing gun violence. A company named SGTi offers technology to retrofit existing guns and only an authorized user can press their finger on a fingerprint scanner on the firearm, the scanner compares the print to its internal database, finds a match, and allows the user full access to use the firearm. This fingerprint scanner could be manipulated by hacking or having matched a false print of the user for access to the firearm, however these high tech systems would have follow up safety precautions and assure the system itself with further background checks to detect if the user is authorized to fire the gun. Technology can save lives and further reduce these massive death rates, as long as gun extremists and gun trade groups don’t take the technological advancement as a threat. Unfortunately, gun fundamentalists don’t see this technology as a safety precaution and want to kill the advancement before its favorable to use to save lives.

Reports from Fortune claim that their has been violent threats made from gun extremists towards two gun business dealers because they were selling a semiautomatic pistol called Armatix iPi, another addition to the development of the advanced smart gun, that uses radio-frequency identification or RFID which electromagnetic fields automatically identifies and track tags attached to firearms preventing anyone but the authorized user to fire it. Gun extremists and gun industries oppose the technology of smart guns because they fear that it is the first step towards making extreme gun control laws. Many of them stating that guns are already safe enough and don’t need to add anymore obstacles to be able to fire the gun. These obstacles would be a complication to unauthorized users trying to get access, as well become a process for licensed gun handlers from accessing their own guns. Although, with the correct paperwork the licensed authorized user would have no problem being granted a firearm rather than an unauthorized user trying to get possession of a gun. Parents seem to disagree with gun extremists on the fact that they wouldn’t want their children from accidentally firing the gun and there have been many cases of accidental firing incidents. However, this advanced technology is a useful obstacle in preventing accidents like those from ever happening again because a safety lock isn’t enough of a child prevention and being cautious of their safety.

Eventually everything will go digital and this trend continues in the modern world. Wiring electronics into firearms feels like the inevitable next step for the tech industry, which has succeeded in putting motherboards in vacuum cleaners, microwaves, and doorbells. Digital technology experts can use their technical expertise to reduce the frequency of casual mass shootings. More appliances and objects that were mechanical are now beginning to enter the new wave and becoming digital. In another source for this research it had revealed a claim on guns becoming digital and what would be the outcome of that. ‘Can Computer Professionals and Digital Technology Engineers Help Reduce Gun Violence’ is an article full of lingering questions that can help open the mind of the readers to the possibility and reality of guns becoming digital as technology continues advancing. Mainly agreeing to the idea of this new digital gun advancement, the question is could digital experts help ensure that the firearms would be more safe and less useful in committing crimes? Like many other appliances and devices that undergo digital transformation the behavior of society transform as well. The advancement of the cell phone has affected the population and our society in most parts positively, the same can be established for these biometrical bearer of arms. There has been talk of wishful advancements for preventing unauthorized users from any guns by possible logins for those assigned authority to the firearm making it harder for anybody to steal and cause harm. Also, using techniques experts have established onto other modern systems and mechanical engineering to track down objects as easy with a push of a button as most digital technology can be when lost or stolen. Focusing on the future, parents should also look into the development of gun safety from accidental shootings of their young ones.

Advancements in technology have excluded children from further usage from other dangers, but the gun industry seems not so cautious and seem careless of their safety. There has been cases were kids have shot themselves accidentally even with the safety lock applied before. ‘Pittsburgh Post-Gazette’ article by Lacretia Wimbly had recently this year reported an incident where ‘horseplaying’ with a gun inside an apartment building caused the life of a teenage girl. Research from Gifford Law Center To Prevent Gun Violence determine household guns are a major source of weapons used by young ones in violence against themselves or against others. Between 70 and 90% of guns used in youth suicides, unintentional shootings among children, and school shootings perpetrated by shooters under the age of 18 are acquired from the home or the homes of relatives or friends. Many critical-safety systems developed have the ability to abort situations in which the system calculates a malfunction and prevents accidents that could cause any damage. This type of technology is actually being used in the military today. The military has developed systems were they can prevent incidents occurring from false command or manipulation of the digital technology. Advancements in technology helps form the most potent military forces by making best use of our resources, both economic and human. It is essential for the United States to maintain superiority in those technologies of critical importance to our security and of their own. Having the ability to prevent the inanimate object from firing without command and detects its own errors is one of the many possible ways for dropping the numbers of mass shootings in our communities.

The debate on applying more smart guns are rising concerns for more technical support from experts to assure this advancement is the right direction to prevent further community threats and gun violence. President Obama advocated their potential as part of his emotional speech in the communities awakening of the San Bernardino mass shooting. The NRA (National Rifle Association) have claimed not being opposed to the idea of technology being used and applying the advancements to firearms as a way of prevention of violent deeds being committed constantly in our society. The smart guns have become a rising in America from Canada’s influential technology development in an attempt to control and limit the gun violence problem. Inventor Kai Kloepfer displays his fingerprint-activated smart gun during a gun safety technology expo in Milwaukee on January 16, 2019. Smart guns, also known as ‘personalized guns’, use technology like fingerprint readers or radio frequency identification (RFID) to let only authorized users unlock the gun and fire it. However, many gun owners aren’t buying the new technology development as many thought they would. The biggest concerns among gun owners were the added cost of the technology advancement and the slight chance that the smart gun could fail to unlock when needed in an emergency. The 22-caliber pistol was the first smart gun to come to the market in the United States in 2014, but retailers quickly abandoned their plans to sell it due to a major backlash from gun rights supporters and extremists. The 2002 Childproof Handgun Law of New Jersey, states that once smart gun technology is commercially available, all guns sold must be smart guns. However, the law began boycotts nationwide by those who believed it violates their Second Amendment rights. The advancement in technology provided one of the best range shooter ‘smart’ rifle that locks a laser on the target by pushing a small button by the trigger. It’s like a video game with not all the cool features but we’re getting there. Here’s where it’s different. You pull the trigger but the gun decides when to shoot. It fires only when the weapon has been pointed in exactly the right place, taking into account dozens of variables, including wind, shake and distance to the target.

Only 19% of gun owners said they would be extremely likely or somewhat likely to pay an additional $300 on top of a standard weapon’s retail price for ‘smart’ features. 70% said they were very or somewhat concerned about the weapons’ reliability. Researchers suggest rather than looking for new technologies that primarily appeal to gun owners who already take great care to prevent unauthorized use of their weapons by securing their firearms in locked safes, the public should focus more on creating more secure safes and other preventions than advancing the threat from reckless users. Moreover, gun owners who reported already having safe storage practices for their firearms were 50% more likely to purchase personalized guns, suggesting the products such as safes and safety locks may have only a limited impact on securing their households from threats in their community and unauthorized users.

In conclusion, technology as it progresses and eventually takes over most of our day to day lives, society could actually look into the importance of solving the tragedy from massive gun violence. Looking back at the many accomplishments technology has impacted on our lives with smartphones, smart houses, smart cars, so why not keep advancing to actually help prevent a threat from happening any further. The smart rifle is a great example of smart technology being able to shoot accurately at its target and prevent itself from blasting at any inappropriate time. Also, the gun allows the world to observe this advancement and its skill by uploading recorded videos of the rifle hitting the target and resistance from harming anyone or anything but the target on YouTube and the digital web for all to see the successful work of high tech digital engineering and technology. Although, technology development has been used in accomplishing many ways in improving the economy, it also is greatly appreciated in modern society to work for us and use to our benefit. But we can’t just rely on having guns become ‘smart’ to make ourselves feel safe in communities, the communities need to contribute as well in showing interest in wanting to solve the problem. Just because we can apply digital technology expertise to try solving the problem doesn’t mean that society shouldn’t apply as citizens to debate and take political action to prevent gun violence. Gun violence alone is this nations highly charged issue that must be addressed in many different ways, digital technology smart guns being the opening to brand new modern ideas for further prevention of these tragedies from happening continuously all over this country and the world.

For years, America has experienced gun violence and is getting worse with each passing year. Everyday over a hundred thousand Americans are killed by guns, what’s even more alarming is that it is very easy to get a gun from just about anywhere here in America. Most of these deaths are suicides and the rest are homicides and accidents. I have never experienced gun violence before because I stayed mostly indoors at home. There are over 393 million privately owned guns in the U.S and we know they will never go away. Manufacturing companies must be held liable for misuse to give them incentive to make firearms safer. Also, more rigorous gun laws should be established to make buying and owning a gun much more much more difficult as well as gun-violence restraining orders, meaning law enforcement can confiscate or temporarily bar a person from purchasing firearms.

There are over 10 states here in the U.S that have the weakest gun laws, states such as Alaska, Louisiana, Mississippi, Vermont, and Arizona to name a few. Mississippi has one of the weakest gun laws in the nation and is growing continually weaker over the years which threatens the lives of Mississippi residents. However, Hawaii and California have the lowest gun death rate and the strongest gun laws, with California being ranked number one with the strictest gun laws in the U.S according to the article “These States Have The Most Restrictive Gun Laws in America” on a site called “Showbiz Cheat Sheet”. Another fact is that fewer people die from guns in states with strong gun laws whereas states with weak gun laws where more people die from guns. Moreover, women here in the U.S are 21 times more likely to be shot and killed with a gun than women in other countries that have high income and over 600 women are shot to death every year by their intimate partners which is sickening, women being shot to death by the person who is supposed to love and respect them not give in to their murderous impulse and take her life.

You may be thinking, “When will all of this bloodshed end?, “All the violence involving guns, shouldn’t we just ban all firearms in our country?”, ”Will it solve our nation’s gun violence problem?”. Well, I’d say no because it isn’t much of an option much less a good idea. The right to bear arms is our second amendment as you already know and it is a means to protect ourselves from our government should they try to overstep their bounds and infringe on our individual rights. Also, in order to repeal an amendment such as the 2nd Amendment, all requirements from Article V of the U.S Constitution would have to be met, in other words, it has to reflect the will of the people and not the State to be able to repeal an amendment. So it would be counterintuitive for the government to decide among itself that no citizen should have the right to carry or bear arms. Also, U.S citizens here are strongly supportive of their right to bear arms so they won’t hand over their firearms so easily on top of that it would cause an uproar which will result in another civil war with law enforcement forcing civilians to drop their guns. If that wasn’t enough it also lead to coast to coast pilfering firearms in America and lead to the resignation of thousands of authority figures in our nation that are not willing to enter the homes of gun obsessed owners, more importantly another civil that I have previously mentioned and the death toll will be far worse and will outnumber those killed by guns in previous and recent years. So we can all agree that we do not want another civil here in our country.

Children and teens are also affected staggeringly by being shot to death, injured, or witnessing a family member or friend being killed by a gun. Black and Hispaninc children and teens are impacted by gun violence at dangerously higher rates than white children and teens because of intentional policy decisions which in turn created segregated neighborhoods and underinvestments in their communities. I call that which I have mentioned here systemic deprivation. Children and teens exposed to gun violence severely affects them psychologically and mentally for months if not the rest of their life because by then they’ll live in fear of being killed by a bullet. Unfortunately, many of our politicians are corrupt because all they care about is themselves.

Currently, there are a number of anti-gun violence trying to prevent and reduce gun violence so that we may make our our schools, neighborhoods,and our states safe for future generations to come. According to the statistics in ‘Gun Violence in Cities’ from the site Everytown, Black Americans represent the vast majority of homicide and nonfatal shooting victims in the U.S because of one attributing trend, where a city grows safe and more dangerous, to increase joblessness, segregation, and wealth inequality. Lawmakers need to be doing their job in this battle against gun violence by funding new research into new tools that will help law enforcement collect conclusive evidence, trace all gun crimes, reduce firearm trafficking, and solve gun crimes which will make us all feel safe and happy. We feel safe here in California most notbaly San Diego, because as I had previously mentioned that California has one of the most strictest gun laws in the nation and it is a good thing too so we don’t have to constantly look over our shoulders hoping that no one gets injured or killed. The other states who have weaker gun laws need to follow the examples of other states that have stronger gun laws to pass those laws in that have proven time and time again to prevent future casualties.

I hope that one day our nation will not only have the strictest gun laws in the world but to uphold the safety of residents here in our country with respect and equality.

When I think of gun violence the first thing that comes to mind is the recent upsurge of mass shootings in the last 20 years. The first mass shooting that particularly stands out is the columbine high school massacre in 1999. I was in elementary school when that took place and I remember how much it shook this country and all the media coverage it received. It was not something that I had ever heard of before and at my young age I couldn’t understand what drove someone to want to commit something so horrid. However, gun violence is so much bigger than mass shootings. In some cities it is and everyday way of life. Individuals that grow up surrounded by violence become so accustomed to it that the gravity of it doesn’t register anymore and they become desensitized to it.

Downstream factors that can lead to gun violence are those that occur from a direct action of an individual such as irresponsible gun owners. In particular those that leave their guns laid out possible loaded and not properly stored in a firearm safe, lock box or even a cable lock. Also, those with children in their home who have easy access to guns can lead to the misuse of a gun or the accidental discharge of a weapon causing harm to the child handling the gun and/or anyone in their near vicinity.

Mainstream factors that can lead to gun violence are the relationships that we associate ourselves with. If we grew up in a home where we are introduced to guns and how to operate them at a very young age but lacked proper training of gun safety and responsibility, we probably are not going to second guess ourselves when using firearms for the wrong reasons. Or people fall in with others who participate in elicit activities and may feel pressured to follow in order to feel the need to feel accepted and included.

Upstream factors that can lead to gun violence is that lack of stricter laws that make it more difficult for just anyone to be able to legally obtain a gun. This country seems to have an obsession with their second amendment rights and any suggestion to limit or restrict their ability to exercise their rights is often pointed as unamerican or anti-patriotic. There seems to be a much bigger concern and push to maintain the laws as is in so that the second amendments rights are not violated, but little concern and sense of responsibility with making our country safer by keeping guns out of the hands of people that intent to use them for nefarious actions. Another upstream factor that comes to mind is the active involvement of the NRA in politics. The NRA is a donor to politicians and a powerful gun lobby, they play a big part in the current lack of better gun controls if they are actively working at preventing new bills being proposed that might help pass better gun control laws.

The Growing Concern of Gun Violence in the United States

In the recent years, the conversations of gun violence are increasing dramatically because of some homicide cases. Truly, the gun violence has been the one of biggest elements which threat both personal safety and national security in the United States. According to one of the article from Philadelphia government website, the United States has the 31st highest rate of gun violence in the world. Nationally, 70% of homicides in the United State were committed with a firearm. Since January 1, 2018, there have been 39 mass shootings and almost 10,000 total incidents involving firearms nationally (Walters, 2018).

Gun violence is a continuous problem in the United States. Gun control does not necessarily mean to ban guns, but rather to put a better control on who has access to them. The ongoing issue of whether to keep or eliminate guns has Americans all over the world in distress over an issue that is not impossible to resolve. Gun control is a task that takes a community as a whole to accomplish. No matter how small, every individual’s effort can make a difference. To take control of guns and put a better grasp on who has access to them is not necessarily one for those with more authority. We live in a society where fear is abundant and safety is desperately desired. Many feel that the right to carry a gun provides them with security and comfort. However, without gun control, our society will be faced with more hardships than expected. With help, Americans could have a controlled system of gun usage without banning them all together.

The History and Legal Background of Gun Ownership

The ownership of firearms became legally in the United States since their second amendment of the constitution enacted in 1791. It seems a symbol of the right to freedom, however, it has also brought a great convenience to criminals. The gun shooting accident are repeatedly happening in United States each year and lots of innocent people get hurt. What more serious is, the number of such tragedies are continuing to increase. Many people living in the United States worry about their lives’ safety. While the public are appealing the gun ban, but there are some obstacles from laws and politics. Therefore, the aim of this essay is to explain the problems of gun ownership in United States and then gives some possible solutions, as well as the challenges of the solutions.

In addition, another cause of gun violence is different attitudes and policies toward regulate guns of each states. It enhances both legal and illegal mobility of guns and cause more gun violence and higher crime rate. For example, it is easy and dangerous that someone could buy a gun in Arizona which known as a not strict gun regulation state and take gun to New York which known as a strict regulation state and suspect to make a terrorist attack. As long the policies toward guns are different in each state, there will be a way that terrorists buy firearms in one state and take them to another state. So there is an increasing trend of gun violence and related crime rate. And it will also be illustrated by statistics and analysis.

Proposed Solutions to Control Gun Violence

Guns should not be banned as a whole. There are many precautions that can be taken before completely getting rid of all guns. The first step to controlling the usage of guns would be to limit who has the access to purchase them. This might sound difficult, but it doesn ‘t have to be. One way is to have a full background check on anyone who is interested in buying a gun before being sold to, insuring that the gun is in good hands. If the buyer rejects the background check that should be an automatic red flag and the supplier should not sell to the buyer. “The Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence released an analysis of recent mortality data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The results included a grim new record for gun violence: 39,773 Americans were killed by guns in 2017, a dramatic increase of more than 1,000 people from the year before. The responses to this report were fraught, with some people pointing to mass shootings as the major culprit, while others were quick to blame “inner-city” violence’ (Weiss, 2018). This statistic shows how putting guns in the wrong hands can ultimately be threat to society as a whole. Guns can be used to good, but gun violence will continue to increase without proper precautions.

On the other hand, there is a surge of strong pressure of gun control in the U.S. which is from National Rifle Association (NRA). NRA strongly support the second amendment constitution and spends a lot of money on lobbying activities. They claim that the people ‘s education should be strengthened rather than deprive their rights of gun ownership. Even though, the fact of an increasing number of gun violent cannot be avoided (Fleming, A., McLean, D. S., & Tatalovich, R., 2018). The pressure from social activities and people who lost their families in the gun violent can also help the gun control. For example, in 2018, Kroger and Walmart had said that their stores would no longer sell guns to customers younger than twenty-one (Tablot, 2018).

Violence can be defined as many things, but when it comes to guns it is unprecedented and can be very avoidable. Too many people have lost their live due to mass shooting and black market sales of guns. By putting aside the political affiliation of congressmen and by moving to pass bills for regulation on gun ownership and what type of guns can be bought, the amount of violence, death and the injury rates caused by guns will reduce. Maybe this is what America needs to become a more peaceful and safer society.

Incorporating a gun safety course before allowing the buyer to purchase a gun will insure that the buyer has a complete understanding of the certain gun before being allowed to purchase it. This would be set up like a driver ‘s test but more intense. The customer would learn how to handle the gun properly, shoot the gun, and gun safety. Buyers would have to pass with a high percentage before being allowed to purchase a gun. This could like training sessions, to be sure buyers know how to handle a gun before taking it into their household. Many said training course goes off of making a complete background check mandatory and will ensure that the gun is being placed in the proper hands.

Federal buyers must go through a specific resource to purchase their guns. Consumers should not be buying their guns at places open to the general public. “Every day, about eight kids are fatally shot or wounded by guns”. By not heavily enforcing gun control, kids are being exposed to guns and gun violence at young ages. Kids are being raised with an easy access to guns. Restricting where federal officials can purchase guns will also cut down the amount of mishaps in between the purchaser and who is allowed to get their hands on such a massive type of guns. This would make areas safer by knowing that large gun weapons aren’t just next door or down the street from them.

Challenges and Obstacles in Implementing Gun Control

Many manufacturing places will sell to criminals knowing that they will make more money because guns are not as readily available. Randomly checking on all of the manufacturing companies that have been previously selling machinery to criminals would decrease gun sales dramatically (Steinhauer, 2008). However, this change would be for the safety of the community as a whole. “A selective ban makes more sense and also gets a larger endorsement since people who want to own a weapon for their own safety would rather have criminals with no access to guns than the other way around’ (Gold, Simon, 2016). Selective bans create an advantage for the community as a whole by simply modifying gun use instead of restricting gun usage.

Any of these actions can be made possible while still pleasing the public by not taking guns away as a whole. Guns are not always considered a weapon and should not be banned completely, they can just become dangerous when in the wrong hands (Abrams, Chan, 2018). These are large steps to take that can easily be made possible if someone in a higher position pursued it. However, controlling the usage of who gets their hands on these guns can easily be done in just a few short steps. This initially will prevent crimes, while still allowing the usage of guns to those who have earned the right to operate them. Gun control is a precaution that should be taken to ensure the safety of all American citizens.

Another effect of gun violence is that there are so many people was shoot by accident. More guns mean higher risk because the possibility of people shoot you whether on purpose or not will definitely increase because probably everyone has a gun in their pockets around you but you don’t know if he or she is a psychopath series killer or CIA agent, there is just a thin line between street and battlefield. So you can barely avoid bullets completely when the gun fight really happened.

Gun violence is becoming too common in this country. So common, that when there is a shooting, people are unaffected by such news. There has been desire from the people of America to change gun policy, but some also argue against this because it goes against our Second Amendment rights. Although there are reasonable arguments on behalf of and against more regulations on guns, more regulations and background checks would reduce crime and death due to guns.

Yet, as long as people can continue to hold guns legally in the U.S., the anxiety about security in people ‘s hearts will never disappear. Thus, people will continues buying guns and gun violent will keep happen in America.

Conclusion: A Balanced Approach to Reducing Gun Violence

In conclusion, the gun control problem in the U.S. is very complex. People buying guns in America because other people own the guns, therefore they also need to buy a gun in order to protect themselves. If the personal gun ownership can be restricted, the number of gun violent will be radically reduced and people in America may feel more safety. However, legal and political constraints increase the difficulty of gun controls. Hence, one suitable way is that American government can slowly improve policy with the help from the general public and social activities.

References

1. Abrams, S. B. A., & Chan, M. (2018). Guns in America. (cover story). Time, 192(18/19), 26. Retrieved from https://library.lakeland.edu/login?url=https://search/ebscohostcom.library.lakeland.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,cpid&cstid=s6222084&db=f6h&AN=132594440&site=ehost-live&scope=site
2. Abramson, A. (2018, March 27). Justice stevens wants to repeal the second amendment. Here’s why that’s so hard. Times. Retrieved from http://time.com/5216962/john-paul-stevenssecond-amendment/
3. Fleming, A., McLean, D. S., & Tatalovich, R. (2018). Debating Gun Control in Canada and the United States: Divergent Policy Frames and Political Cultures. World Affairs, 181(4), 348–371. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/0043820018812609
4. Gold, L. H., & Simon, R. I. (2016). Gun violence and mental illness (Vol. First edition). Arlington, Virginia: American Psychiatric Publishing. Retrieved from https://library.lakeland.edu/login?url=https://search-ebscohost.com.library.lakeland.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,cpid&custid=s622084&db=nlebk&AN=1610193&site=ehost-live&scope=site
5. Steinhauer, J. (2008, April 15). At state level, more attempts to limit guns. New York Times, p. 1. Retrieved from https://library.lakeland.edu/login?url=https://search-ebscohost.com.library.lakeland.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,cpid&custid=s6222084&db=aph&AN=31643478&site=ehost-live&scope=site
6. Talbot, M. (2018, March 12). The gun-control debate after parkland. The New Yorker. Retrieved from https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/03/12/the-gun-control-debate-after-parkland
7. Waters, S. (2018, March 8). Gun control policies. Retrieved from https://www.phila.gov/2018-03-20-gun-control-policies/