Different arguments have been raised about the issue of gun control. And these arguments have surfaced even more since those horrific events at Virginia Tech where someone with mental issues was allowed to buy not only one but two guns which he used to slaughter his 32 victims including himself! Gun control opponents have argued that more gun control would infringe upon the rights of law abiding citizens to bear arms. The argument is that the Second Amendment which states that law abiding citizens have the right to bear arms would be infringed. They have also argued that gun control would not reduce crime, in particular those which involve guns. They have even said that having easy access to a gun could actually save a life or prevent a crime. An example was an incident in West Seattle in 2002 where a man used his roommate’s gun to end a violent assault by an intruder who had broken into his home. This was taken from a news article from the Seattle Post, January 16, 2006.
Gun control advocates however have argued that gun control is needed, saying that the United States has more lenient gun laws and as a result has a higher murder rate in comparison to countries with stricter gun laws, namely Canada, Britain, and Japan. A section of an article entitled, Guns – Myths, Facts, and Statistics noted that the introduction of gun control in Washington DC, Kansas City, Canada, and Massachusetts, the Bartley – Fox Amendment, and the Brady Law shows that the murder rate does fall. Statistics used show how the murder rate per 100,000 increases as does the fire arm sales between 1985 and 1993. Other statistics show that guns were the weapon of choice mainly used to commit murder.
Based on the statistics and evidence there seems to be no easy solution to the issue of gun control. Some feel that gun control would infringe their rights to bear arms while others feel it should come with guidelines and restrictions. More studies and research need to be done on this issue. Perhaps the 2nd Amendment needs to be redefined because some people don’t really understand the provisions in it. What is your take on this sensitive issue? Are you all in favor or stricter gun laws or should the present laws remain the same?
Works Cited
Castro, Hector. “The Fight against Firearms.” Seattle Post – Intelligencer 3 May, 2006
Guns – Facts and Myths 7 Feb, 2007
http:// pearlyabraham.triped.com/htmls/myth-guns2html
Guppy, Paul. “Additional Gun Control Laws will do nothing to Stop Violence.” (Final Edition) Seattle Post – Intelligencer 16, Jan, 2007
Ruoca, James. Just Facts. 1999. 10 June, 1999
http:// justfacts.com/gun-control.html
3 comments:
I believe that every American must learn how to shoot a gun and every house hold should have a gun. No person in their right mind would mess with people the way they do right now if they knew that there was a gun close by. Education is the key. Virginia Tech was a tragedy but it was no ones fault. What people forget is that more illegally owned guns kill more people then legally owned guns. This is the real problem that should be addressed. Los Angeles Times just did an article arguing that Europe, dispite all it's gun control, is having problems with break-ins, a recent school shooting which killed 17 people, and another shooting that took 14 legislators lives. We are not the only country with problems, but obviously we can't fix them by taking guns from the good, honest people.
so can we fix the problem by arming everyone with guns? shouldn't we leave the police alone to do their jobs instead of trying to do their jobs for them? should we become a nation of gunslingers so that whenever we want to solve a problem the first thing we want to do is get a gun to take them out? the whole aim should be to save lives not take them. excuse me for preaching but that is so unagainst what God would want
Hey Donny. I know this is an old post, but I couldn't pass up an opportunity to comment. :)
My thought on the issue, for what it's worth, it this:
Gun laws only effect law-abiding citizens who, as the name would suggest, follow laws. Therefore, legislating whether or not law-abiding citizens can own guns is fine, but this legislation will have no bearing or impact on those individuals which are not law-abiding, and who choose to cause harm with their guns. This is truly a problem of enforcement, rather than legislation. Simply put, there aren't enough police to protect us as you assert.
I, as a law-abiding citizen, cannot simply expect the police to be there anytime a maniac with a gun threatens me or my family. I can, however, expect to have the right to run to my locked box (where responsible gun owners keep their guns), grab my ridiculously over-powered pistol (because I'm American, after all), and cap the bastard in the knees a couple of times. Well, if that's not what he wanted he should have tried to rob a Canadian.
All thanks to the 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms. Thank you founding fathers.
Post a Comment