Gun Ownership Pros And Cons

The liberal ideology behind gun ownership takes the stance that some type of gun restriction or ban should be imposed to control the gun violence in the United States. The vast majority would be for an imposed restriction, while the farther left and fewer liberals would suggest for an all-out ban or ban on certain guns. Furthermore, believing that the gun is what causes the crime. If the gun was restricted in some way people would not have the ability to cause such harm to the general welfare of the common people. Some of these restrictions are: maximum clip limits, ban on certain assault rifles, and a system to track gun ownership. These bans to liberals make sense to curtail the mass shooting epidemic in the United States. Consequently, with …show more content…
Each shooting allows for the ideology of gun restriction to be a more prevalent thing in society to protect American citizens. Not taking into account that the government could turn on the citizens. Being unarmed seems more safe to liberal ideology because of the incidents of violence of the few.
Phoebe Maltz Bovy wrote an article in the New Republic on an all-out gun ban. The plethora of reasons were mostly acquainted with far left ideology. Stating, “Do not sort the population into those who might do something evil or foolish or self-destructive with a gun those who surely will not. As if this could be known” (Bovy). People that put gun owners in bad light are the ones who mishandle them. If guns were out of the picture the generalization of those people would not be an issue. However, she does not place her faith in the government doing an adequate job of controlling the guns in the United States, instead, she wants an all-out ban because it seems to be the only logical solutions to the shootings in the United States. Furthermore, Bovy believes the issue is too complicated to just put a ban on certain guns. If people are still allowed to