Pros And Cons Of Gun Free Zones

1467 Words 6 Pages
Although gun control laws may appear to lower gun related crimes, it tends to do more harm than good, such as increasing rates of other violent crimes; that “gun free zones” tend not to prevent gun crime, and historically, gun control being used as tool for tyranny and oppression around the world. What gun control has been shown to cause in America is to increase the rates of violent crimes. Violent crimes increase after the passage of laws meant to hinder the law-abiding citizens’ options for self-defense because criminals know they are less likely to get injured or killed in the commission of their crimes by their chosen victims. A study performed in 2007 by two Harvard criminologists studying gun control laws in America and Europe found …show more content…
These are places such as public or private schools, universities or colleges, or businesses that have essentially banned guns and possibly other weapons from their premises. This goes for legally-owned and legally-concealed weapons as well. A report released in October of 2014 showed that, “92% of mass shootings between January 2009 and July 2014 took place in gun-free zones.” (Citation – breitbart.com) This study was conducted by the Crime Prevention Research Center in response to Everytown for Gun Safety claims that only 14% of shootings took place in gun-free zones. Using fallacious reasoning, Everytown came to this conclusion by ignoring important factors, such as different laws in states and cities, or that they would count shooting that took place in Los Angeles in a public area, where guns would be allowed, but ignore the fact that L.A. issues a small number of concealed carry licenses (Citation – breitbart.com). Densely populated areas that also have strong gun control laws seem to have the most potential for these types of attacks. One alternative to gun-free zones would be to have armed guards at these locations to act as deterrents to help prevent such attacks from taking place, and in the event that one did occur, a much faster response time then what many police departments tend to offer in most areas of the country. Another alternative would be to just allow legal concealed-carry in places such as universities, …show more content…
One law the Nazis maintained was a gun registration that would replace total gun bans in the country. When the National Socialists Party came to power, they, “began using these registration records to confiscate and seize weapons from anyone they deemed an enemy of the state” (Citation – politifact.com). While it is indeed accurate that the totalitarian regime loosened gun restrictions for some German citizens, those they would deem acceptable, they completely forbade Jews or Jewish business from owning any type of firearms or ammunition. This type of need for control over a certain group of people is the definition of an oppressive and tyrannical

Related Documents