Shooting Down Gun Control The security alarms are ringing; everyone is in a panic. An active shooter has entered the campus. Teachers lock their doors and attempt to hide themselves and students from danger, gathering anything in proximity to use for self-defense: books, pencils, backpacks, chairs. Every person in that classroom knows that if an assailant was to come through the doors they would be hapless, sitting ducks. Unfortunately, pencils and books are no match to a high-powered firearm, and tragedy is likely to ensue. This school is a strict “Gun Free Zone”, just like many other schools in America. Because of these laws, people are left vulnerable when unfortunate situations arise. Criminals do not follow rules and regulations, that’s
…show more content…
Per this logic, it is a safe assumption to say that strict gun control laws do directly prevent criminals from attaining weapons, they just slow down the process. These laws, in theory, may temporarily halt firearm-induced homicide rates, but they do not provide a thorough resolution to the dilemma. Background checks are used every time a firearm is bought from a store, and in no way is this negative, just minimally effective as far as directly reducing gun violence. Background checks are even more extensive when applying for a Concealed Carry Permit, which allows a citizen to possess a firearm unbeknownst to those around them – such as inside the waistband or in a vehicle. But once the guns are purchased, they can very easily be sold to a person with a criminal history, without a background check taking place. This is a major flaw in the system, but no sure way to regulate private firearm sales exist – nor can it ever exist. Every day, guns are being traded and sold without government knowledge. In cases such as street gangs, serial numbers are even removed to avoid the criminal from having the weapon traced back to …show more content…
There is not a direct correlation; the whole matter itself is complicated to say the least. Contrary to popular belief, some of the countries with the strictest gun laws have some of the highest violent crime rates. Take Venezuela for example, ranked second in the world in gun-related deaths. The rate of violent deaths increased dramatically after the government began seizing weapons in 2012. The homicide rate in America, on the other hand, was at an all-time low in 2014, although gun ownership rates are increasing exponentially (“Labels Matter”). Australia has fallen under the same umbrella as Venezuela. In 1996, after a mass shooting, over 700,000 firearms were handed over to the Australian Government, and gun laws have since then been strictly enforced and regulated. Gun violence has primarily become an issue in gangs in Australia – using guns that were obtained illegally. Firearm offenses have more than doubled in the last decade from 2300 in 2006 to almost 5000 currently (“Young, Dumb, and Armed”). Australia and Venezuela are only two examples of how strict gun laws affect a country. Melbourne, one of the more prominent cities in Australia, is now abundant with gang violence. Gun laws obviously did not deter these Australian thugs from violent crime, synonymously with the gang members in America, or any other
Per this logic, it is a safe assumption to say that strict gun control laws do directly prevent criminals from attaining weapons, they just slow down the process. These laws, in theory, may temporarily halt firearm-induced homicide rates, but they do not provide a thorough resolution to the dilemma. Background checks are used every time a firearm is bought from a store, and in no way is this negative, just minimally effective as far as directly reducing gun violence. Background checks are even more extensive when applying for a Concealed Carry Permit, which allows a citizen to possess a firearm unbeknownst to those around them – such as inside the waistband or in a vehicle. But once the guns are purchased, they can very easily be sold to a person with a criminal history, without a background check taking place. This is a major flaw in the system, but no sure way to regulate private firearm sales exist – nor can it ever exist. Every day, guns are being traded and sold without government knowledge. In cases such as street gangs, serial numbers are even removed to avoid the criminal from having the weapon traced back to …show more content…
There is not a direct correlation; the whole matter itself is complicated to say the least. Contrary to popular belief, some of the countries with the strictest gun laws have some of the highest violent crime rates. Take Venezuela for example, ranked second in the world in gun-related deaths. The rate of violent deaths increased dramatically after the government began seizing weapons in 2012. The homicide rate in America, on the other hand, was at an all-time low in 2014, although gun ownership rates are increasing exponentially (“Labels Matter”). Australia has fallen under the same umbrella as Venezuela. In 1996, after a mass shooting, over 700,000 firearms were handed over to the Australian Government, and gun laws have since then been strictly enforced and regulated. Gun violence has primarily become an issue in gangs in Australia – using guns that were obtained illegally. Firearm offenses have more than doubled in the last decade from 2300 in 2006 to almost 5000 currently (“Young, Dumb, and Armed”). Australia and Venezuela are only two examples of how strict gun laws affect a country. Melbourne, one of the more prominent cities in Australia, is now abundant with gang violence. Gun laws obviously did not deter these Australian thugs from violent crime, synonymously with the gang members in America, or any other