The stricter the gun control laws the lower the incidents happen. It’s a cause and effect. The District of Columbia is a prime example of that. Last year, homicides--about 80 percent of which are caused by firearms--were up 7 percent from the year before, to 181. That makes D.C. 's one of the highest per capita murder rates in the country. If the gun ban is struck down, the District will very likely see an increase in firearms ownership and perhaps a rise in burglaries by criminals trying to obtain guns (Schwartz). Thus we should expect the opposite to happen if the gun ban isn 't struck down and in fact made more stricter. Those rates will decrease due to more gun control laws being enforced. Guns are made for one purpose and one purpose only, to kill. This is why guns should not be easy to get a hold …show more content…
Gun control laws do not take away people’s rights to bear arm but it limits to what kind of guns can be sold and who can buy them. Weapons like the M16 being sold to the common citizen is surely an eyebrow raiser. How would you feel seeing a typical citizen walking out with a newly purchased assault rifle? Gun control laws will limit the different kind of guns being sold because certain guns should stay in the military rather than in the reach of average citizens. Not only that but stricter gun control laws will require background checks to make sure people are in their right state of mind and don’t have a record to them. Initiative 594 would expand the state 's background check requirements to cover gun transfers or sales, including those that take place at gun shows or online (Pickert). Mental illnesses, fugitives, and convicted felons are the things checked for before letting a citizen purchase a gun along side with a required time frame before releasing the gun to the purchaser. This is a safety precaution before letting just anyone purchase a gun. Gun control laws are set to control guns and who are able to get them. Gun control laws do not take away guns and people 's rights to