According to information provided by Newsweek, there has been a decrease in not only one but several things. First off, although gun deaths have not come to an end, the country has seen a 59 percent decrease in gun homicides between the year 1995 and 2006. Also, Australia’s murder rate has decreased to one per 100,000, while the United States, thankfully better than before, is close to 4.5 per 100,000. Furthermore, gun homicides have decreased more than 65 percent too. However, the most stunning statistic is, since 1996 Australia has not had a mass shooting; that is 16 years since they’ve had one ("GUN CONTROL: WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM OTHER ADVANCED COUNTRIES"). In conclusion, if the United States takes similar actions, it can see a difference
…show more content…
Although researchers don’t know the percentage for indirect costs because of its difficulty to measure, about 87 percent of direct costs comes from the government or the tax payers’ ("What Does Gun Violence Really Cost?"). With that in mind, it’s a burden on society. However, no one knows the cost of gun violence for sure because of the lack of evidence. The reason is some states don’t require their hospitals to track gun wounds, and the NRA and other supporters have pressured political leaders to close research related to firearms. But thanks to Mother Jones research based on Ted Millers research, people are able to see an estimate cost of gun violence annually. Now in conclusion, we should enforce and make stricter gun control laws. Because we must try to make a difference in gun violence by reducing the rate of gun related deaths in our country, reducing the number of firearms owned, reducing the cost of government, and by preventing criminals and mentally ill people from obtaining firearms legally and illegally. Also because there’s evidence that shows a correlation between states and countries with stricter and more lenient gun control laws. Now although the issue of gun violence in America won’t end completely, it won’t hurt to try and do something about
Although researchers don’t know the percentage for indirect costs because of its difficulty to measure, about 87 percent of direct costs comes from the government or the tax payers’ ("What Does Gun Violence Really Cost?"). With that in mind, it’s a burden on society. However, no one knows the cost of gun violence for sure because of the lack of evidence. The reason is some states don’t require their hospitals to track gun wounds, and the NRA and other supporters have pressured political leaders to close research related to firearms. But thanks to Mother Jones research based on Ted Millers research, people are able to see an estimate cost of gun violence annually. Now in conclusion, we should enforce and make stricter gun control laws. Because we must try to make a difference in gun violence by reducing the rate of gun related deaths in our country, reducing the number of firearms owned, reducing the cost of government, and by preventing criminals and mentally ill people from obtaining firearms legally and illegally. Also because there’s evidence that shows a correlation between states and countries with stricter and more lenient gun control laws. Now although the issue of gun violence in America won’t end completely, it won’t hurt to try and do something about