Pros And Cons Of Banning Firearms

Good Essays
Banning Firearms
“As of December 23, a total of 12,942 people had been killed in the United States in 2015 in a gun homicide, unintentional shooting, or murder/suicide” (Mascia, “15 Statistics That Tell the Story of Gun Violence This Year”). “There were, on average, 16.4 such [mass] shootings a year from 2007 to 2013, compared with an average of 6.4 shootings annually from 2000 to 2006” (Schmidt, “F.B.I. Confirms a Sharp Rise in Mass Shootings Since 2000”). These statistics prove that within the past couple of years, gun violence has been a rising epidemic. America is in need of drastic change in order to stop this epidemic from growing larger. “Last year alone, there were more mass shootings - in which four or more people were killed or injured
…show more content…
For instance, “of the 84,495,500 property crimes committed between 2007 and 2011, 0.12% of the victims (103,000) protected themselves with a threat of use or use of a firearm” (“Should More Gun Control Laws Be Enacted?”). This statistic is minuscule in the grand scheme of things. Banning firearms would prevent a substantial amount of crimes from being committed than those currently being prevented by innocent civilians using them as a defense. In fact, in nearly all cases the presence of a gun establishes a highly violent environment. An article about the pro and con arguments of gun control stated, “gun-inflicted deaths [often] ensue from impromptu arguments and fights; in the US, two-thirds of the 7,900 deaths in 1981 involving arguments and brawls were caused by guns” (“Should More Gun Control Laws Be Enacted?”). These are everyday people that have now killed or been killed in situations that could have easily been averted. In a country where guns are so accessible and are frequently talked about and depicted on television, people tend to not take them as seriously as they are. However, these are weapons that can kill in a matter of seconds, yet we allow people without any bit training to own and carry them. A ban on firearms would prevent these two-thirds’ conflicts from consequently ending in death, by not having access to the guns, there will be no killings by the guns. Ordinarily, occurrences of …show more content…
Susan Milligan, a writer for US News, stated, “Opponents of any kind of gun restrictions argue that they are meaningless, since criminals by definition don 't follow the law, and therefore won 't allow gun laws to hamstring their criminal behavior. That 's true. But gun violence isn 't only committed by classic criminals, as recent gun-related tragedies show” (Milligan, “We Need Gun Control to Stop More Than Criminals”). Although it is irrational to believe we can stop all the criminals from committing acts of gun violence, it is realistic to believe that by banning firearms we can stop everyday people from acting alike. In practically all circumstances of mass murder, the perpetrator is a seemingly average person who snaps and has firearms accessible, by banning guns we 'd be preventing these type of cases from occurring. For example, a gunman opened fire in an Indiana grocery store, killing two people with a semi-automatic weapon before police shot and killed the gunman. He had no criminal record even though his behavior may have suggested he had. (Milligan, “We Need Gun Control to Stop More Than Criminals”). No one could have guessed this man was going to carry out what he did, however, this man and the two people he killed could with a doubt still be alive, if he simply had not been able to get a gun. There is no exact

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    The law to take away guns would not affect criminals, because criminals do not follow the law. Without guns for protection, the law-abiding citizens would be helpless to defend themselves against the criminals who would now be the only citizens with guns. The law that was meant to protect would actually lead to the victimization and possible death of law-abiding citizens. This victimization of the defenseless is even prevalent if the criminal does not have a gun. The government of the United Kingdom banned handguns, and over the following years, not only did murder go up, but more people were being killed by knives and strangulation…

    • 1808 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Stricter gun control laws could only help prevent such occasions where a mentally ill shooter has access to a gun and should not. The majority of the 372 registered mass shootings where done by career criminals, not law abiding citizens. No gun law would have the ability to prevent such tragic events as long as criminals are the ones at fault. This is even more evident in cities that ban handguns all…

    • 1368 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The second amendment, right to bear arms, was originally referring to a well regulated militia, not everyday people. Another problem with the second amendment is the type of guns that would have been used regarding the second amendment, for example, a fully automatic rifle is much more dangerous than a single shot muzzle loading rifle. Guns kill 30,000 people in the United States each year and a majority of this is people unfit to use a weapon killing others. Even though there have been many attempts to control the firearms in the U.S. if does not always work. For example, the Federal Weapon Assault Ban banned nineteen models of semi automatic weapons and military features, as well as large capacity magazines.…

    • 1135 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Banning handguns will not prevent criminals from obtaining guns. What these laws will do however is keep perfectly right minded law abiding citizens from defending themselves. Without Handguns citizens are left much more vulnerable. If a ban on handguns went into place the only people that would break the law to obtain a handgun would be the criminals themselves. A law abiding citizen would not go out of their way to obtain a handgun and break the law, making them the only people without some means self-defense.…

    • 1022 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Although it is hard to prove direct causation, countries with stricter gun laws do have lower gun deaths. A major argument against gun laws is that guns don’t kill people, people kill people. I find this ridiculous of course it is true that by itself a gun cannot hurt anyone. The purpose of these laws is to keep it out of the hands of the people that kill people. If you have nothing to hide and are not planning anything nefarious then you would still be able to own a gun, you would just have to abide by the laws and regulation while purchasing and handling the…

    • 1146 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Gun Control Agreed

    • 1166 Words
    • 5 Pages

    There is another situation that if the policemen who have guns have the bias or racism, they may kill the innocent citizens. In the United State, there are 500 innocent Americans are murdered by police every year. (Americans Killed by Cops Now Outnumber Americans Killed in Iraq War) Most of them are Mexican, Asian and Black people. Setting up a strict Guns Control Law can decrease the life threatening to the police department by decline the numbers of guns. After that, the police cannot need bring guns with them anymore, and it also will decrease the numbers of conflicts between citizens and police…

    • 1166 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    That not only will not decrease the number of criminals have guns, but also decrease the number of law-abiding citizens have guns, which make law-abiding citizens lose ability of self – protection. The more important thing is that sources of crime is the people’s thoughts and desires. Each of the shootings the killers was the person who shot, not the gun itself. The Government cannot simply rudely to solve this problem by the way of the gun ban. In the article “Just Take Away Their Guns”, James Q. Wilson wrote that “Our goal should not be the disarming of law-abiding citizens.…

    • 1289 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    No laws will stop or prevent these shootings from ever happening, but just take more and more freedoms away from the people. Why should the American people have to suffer with more restrictions on guns because of the criminal’s actions, when they should be the ones who get punished not the good…

    • 781 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    “There are hundreds of millions of gun owners in this country, and not one of them will have an accident today. The only misuse of guns comes in environments where there are drugs, alcohol, bad parents, and undisciplined children. Period” (Ted Nugent). This quote reflects on the recent mass shootings where firearms were unfortunately placed in the wrong hands. As of December 6, 2015, 355 mass shootings have occurred in the United States.…

    • 949 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Essay On Banning Guns

    • 772 Words
    • 4 Pages

    As a result, I believe banning guns should not be processed because it will only worsen the problem. Banning guns will worsen the problem in different aspects. For example, gang members will always find way to get a gun illegally. They do not care about the law or breaking the law. According to Susan Musser “Breaking the law is their way of living and consequences mean nothing to them.” In addition, people who aren’t part of any gang members will also find a way of getting a gun illegally.…

    • 772 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays

Related Topics