Gun Control Argument Analysis

As a responsible gun owner and a supporter of second amendment rights, I find this question contrary to my core beliefs. Gun control is a hotly contested topic that proponents and opponents alike are deadlocked in their position and neither side will refuse to give in. According to Cramer (2006), some form of Gun control was already established during the colonial and revolutionary period of the country. Each time there was a major incident involving the use or misuse of a firearm that resulted in mass shootings, new controls are conceptualized, submitted for legislation, ratified and enforced (Anonymous, 2013). By the same token, if a period of non-event occurs, some existing gun controls are allowed to expire and never again revisited or …show more content…
It becomes necessary to discuss the pros and cons of this argument so everyone can determine the arguments presented and to determine which one presents a compelling case of what should be the final answer for the gun control …show more content…
Armed civilians are unlikely to stop crimes and are more likely to make dangerous situations, including mass shootings, more deadly. This statement gives the idea that armed civilian are not going to be able to stop crimes and perhaps may even contribute to making the situation worse. According to Follman (2012), there were five cases he researched that armed civilians are not successful in preventing crimes; in instances that they were successful, it is because the shooter is done shooting or they simply run out of ammunition. In one other instance an armed civilian, who also happens to be a firearm instructor tried to stop a shooter who was armed with an AK-47 assault rifle and wearing body armor. In that incident the good intentioned armed civilian died. Additionally, participation of armed civilians in stopping crimes would make it a little more problematic for the law enforcement people responding as they would not know who the bad and the good person in that crime