How Much Gun Regulation is the Right Amount?
The idea of changing current gun regulations has been a raging controversy for the last decade. Violent shootings and massacres have risen a belief that taking guns away from the American Citizens would reduce violence and prevent such atrocities. There’s also an opposing side that fears losing their rights to bear arms. Both sides of the issue have good points in their arguments.
There’s a saying that’s been around for awhile that says “Guns don’t kill people; people kill people” meaning that it’s not actually guns that do the killing but the people behind them. Author David Johnson disagrees with it because he believes that there isn’t a conclusion in that statement as he states in his article …show more content…
The killers during massacres are mentally unstable people, or people who were abused by people around them. They weren’t stable and normal American Citizens. If their mental health was focused on earlier in life, maybe their actions could have been prevented. On the other hand Johnson believes that it’s the fact of the matter of that guns make it easier to kill people than it would be otherwise. He brings up a bazooka and the legality of it. It is outlawed in America because “they do make killing people in mass easier to accomplish” (Johnson). The saying “Guns don’t kill people, people do” is questioned by Johnson with things such …show more content…
Johnson suggested that states should more strictly regulate guns as states with stricter gun control “have fewer gun related deaths” (Johnson). He also emphasizes that proximate cause and gun control should be two things that are closely looked at together as one. It’s too generalized of a problem and it needs to be broken down and examined closer than it has been. Johnson says that we should focus on teaching kids in schools about guns to help lessen the amount of gun related deaths. Why not take more preventive action instead of just diminishing the problem? He thinks that American’s should be able to keep their firearms and that nothing about that should be
The idea of changing current gun regulations has been a raging controversy for the last decade. Violent shootings and massacres have risen a belief that taking guns away from the American Citizens would reduce violence and prevent such atrocities. There’s also an opposing side that fears losing their rights to bear arms. Both sides of the issue have good points in their arguments.
There’s a saying that’s been around for awhile that says “Guns don’t kill people; people kill people” meaning that it’s not actually guns that do the killing but the people behind them. Author David Johnson disagrees with it because he believes that there isn’t a conclusion in that statement as he states in his article …show more content…
The killers during massacres are mentally unstable people, or people who were abused by people around them. They weren’t stable and normal American Citizens. If their mental health was focused on earlier in life, maybe their actions could have been prevented. On the other hand Johnson believes that it’s the fact of the matter of that guns make it easier to kill people than it would be otherwise. He brings up a bazooka and the legality of it. It is outlawed in America because “they do make killing people in mass easier to accomplish” (Johnson). The saying “Guns don’t kill people, people do” is questioned by Johnson with things such …show more content…
Johnson suggested that states should more strictly regulate guns as states with stricter gun control “have fewer gun related deaths” (Johnson). He also emphasizes that proximate cause and gun control should be two things that are closely looked at together as one. It’s too generalized of a problem and it needs to be broken down and examined closer than it has been. Johnson says that we should focus on teaching kids in schools about guns to help lessen the amount of gun related deaths. Why not take more preventive action instead of just diminishing the problem? He thinks that American’s should be able to keep their firearms and that nothing about that should be