How would stricter gun control laws affect gun violence in the United States of America?
Social Lens
Word Count : 1255
Throughout the world, many countries have had different views when it comes to restrictions placed on guns. Unfortunately, it sometimes takes a tragic event to make governments think about whether or not they are doing all they can to keep their people safe. In America, however, it seems as if we live in a society where things such as mass shootings are just considered as a part of life, and are inevitable. This however, is not true, seeing that other countries have implemented gun control legislation and have experienced highly positive results. Because restrictions placed on guns reduce gun violence, …show more content…
The Australian government took immediate action, with the leadership of Prime Minister John Howard, a conservative who had only been in office for a little over a month, making a bipartisan deal for gun control legislation, only twelve days after the massacre (Oremus). Together, they enacted sweeping gun control laws, one of the largest gun reforms in recent history, and can be seen as a valuable example for gun control advocates today. (Sterbenz). This legislative action also included the banning of numerous firearms, as well as a nationwide buyback program of those firearms. Using a small tax increase on health insurance, the government was able to raise money for the buyback program, which ended up costing $230 million. From the program, the government was able to take more than 700,000 firearms out of circulation, by either buying them or them being handed in voluntarily (Hartmann). Howard was aware of the financial expense this process would take, but he also knew that it would be worth it in the end (Sterbenz). The legislation also put stricter requirements on obtaining a weapon, requiring that owners must individually register every one they own, …show more content…
The Japanese weapons law begins by stating 'No-one shall possess a firearm or firearms or a sword or swords ', and this does not include many exceptions. There is a very small amount of gun ownership, and with that, there is a very small amount of gun crimes. As gun-related crime in other nations increases, many gun control advocates look towards Japan 's gun control policy for example (Fisher). In Japan, it is very difficult to own a gun, and according to Dave Kopel, current Research Director of the Independence Institute, the only weapon that is reasonable to obtain in Japan is a shotgun, for either hunting or skeet shooting. The process of obtaining a weapon includes a painstaking licensing procedure, attending classes, passing a written test, as well as shooting range classes and tests. After that, the applicant is sent to a hospital where a mental health examination is done, and then must show the police a medical certificate proving their mental health and that they are not abusing any illegal substances. The police also investigate the family of the applicant, as well as the applicant him or herself make sure that neither are or were involved in any crime. If the police have any reason to believe that the applicant is dangerous to the property or lives of other people, or they
Social Lens
Word Count : 1255
Throughout the world, many countries have had different views when it comes to restrictions placed on guns. Unfortunately, it sometimes takes a tragic event to make governments think about whether or not they are doing all they can to keep their people safe. In America, however, it seems as if we live in a society where things such as mass shootings are just considered as a part of life, and are inevitable. This however, is not true, seeing that other countries have implemented gun control legislation and have experienced highly positive results. Because restrictions placed on guns reduce gun violence, …show more content…
The Australian government took immediate action, with the leadership of Prime Minister John Howard, a conservative who had only been in office for a little over a month, making a bipartisan deal for gun control legislation, only twelve days after the massacre (Oremus). Together, they enacted sweeping gun control laws, one of the largest gun reforms in recent history, and can be seen as a valuable example for gun control advocates today. (Sterbenz). This legislative action also included the banning of numerous firearms, as well as a nationwide buyback program of those firearms. Using a small tax increase on health insurance, the government was able to raise money for the buyback program, which ended up costing $230 million. From the program, the government was able to take more than 700,000 firearms out of circulation, by either buying them or them being handed in voluntarily (Hartmann). Howard was aware of the financial expense this process would take, but he also knew that it would be worth it in the end (Sterbenz). The legislation also put stricter requirements on obtaining a weapon, requiring that owners must individually register every one they own, …show more content…
The Japanese weapons law begins by stating 'No-one shall possess a firearm or firearms or a sword or swords ', and this does not include many exceptions. There is a very small amount of gun ownership, and with that, there is a very small amount of gun crimes. As gun-related crime in other nations increases, many gun control advocates look towards Japan 's gun control policy for example (Fisher). In Japan, it is very difficult to own a gun, and according to Dave Kopel, current Research Director of the Independence Institute, the only weapon that is reasonable to obtain in Japan is a shotgun, for either hunting or skeet shooting. The process of obtaining a weapon includes a painstaking licensing procedure, attending classes, passing a written test, as well as shooting range classes and tests. After that, the applicant is sent to a hospital where a mental health examination is done, and then must show the police a medical certificate proving their mental health and that they are not abusing any illegal substances. The police also investigate the family of the applicant, as well as the applicant him or herself make sure that neither are or were involved in any crime. If the police have any reason to believe that the applicant is dangerous to the property or lives of other people, or they