Gun Control

Gun Control has been a highly controversial issue in the United States for the past several decades. From assassinations to mass shootings, every time guns and violence come together the issue resurfaces. Should the nation act on stricter gun laws and legislation? Would new gun laws help or hinder the gun crime rate in the United States? The nation stands divided on the issue; both sides taking a firm stance as to what they believe should be done legislatively with guns. Gun control advocates state that the number of and different types of guns in the hands of the American public is simply too great. Gun control advocates reason that more guns lead to more gun crime. Gun crimes have been on the rise since 2005. Currently, the United States ranks twelfth out of one hundred and twelve countries from which the statistics were derived. This equates to nearly thirty thousand people a year in the United States dying as a result of firearms. In the past decade there has been three tragic and widely publicized shootings including Columbine, Nickel Mines, and Virginia Tech. In those three shootings alone, forty-nine people had their lives violently cut short. The guns involved in those atrocities were “powerful” semi-automatic weapon systems. These kinds of weapons are generally regarded as the cause of the high death tolls in those mass shootings. It is being debated whether or not the general public should continue to have legal access to these types of weapons. The Second Amendment states that the right for Americans to keep and bear arms and shall not be infringed; however, gun control advocates debate to what extent the amendment covers. The controversy involves the weapons that copy or mimic the nation’s military and law enforcement weapons, and whether or not the public should have a legal right to own them. According to gun control supporters, these weapons have only one purpose; to kill as many people as possible and as efficiently as possible, Gun advocates and firearm owners across America take a much different stance. Their belief in the Second Amendment and what it stands for guarantees  them the right to own and use guns in from self-defense to defense against a tyrannical government. They believe in the right to defend them no matter the situation and view any anti-gun legislation hindering gun ownership as unlawful and ignorant. The Second Amendment was drawn immediately following the American Revolution. The newly freed colonists had just fought a bloody and crippling war against the oppressive British. Most of the American fighters in the war were normal citizens, statesmen, shopkeepers, and farmers. Though they had a continental army, those common citizens made up the militia and were a much larger fighter force than their counterparts. A well-armed and vigilant American population was able to defeat the tyrannical British crown and gain independence. When our forefathers drafted the Constitution, they wanted to make sure Americans could keep their right to own and possess firearms in order to defend themselves from tyranny if the need ever arose again. Firearm supporters do not see gun ownership as a privilege but a right. They also believe the Second Amendment does not specify what types of guns they are allowed to possess. According to gun activists, it is not the gun that commits the crime but the person pulling the trigger. The recent mass shootings and gun related crimes are linked to today’s ever increasingly violent society. Gun supporters connect gun related deaths with irresponsible, mentally unstable people who act as if guns are “cool” to use against innocent people as they often are in the movies. Furthermore, of the millions of gun owners in the United States, people who use guns the wrong way and not what they were intended for make up only an extremely small fraction of gun violence. Supporters point out that millions of responsible gun owners use guns legally every day and most guns use illegally are in fact illegally acquired or bought. Even though it is a right guaranteed to them by our constitution, this right has to be exercised responsibly. Gun supporters propose instead of instituting laws that limit firearms, our law makers and anti-gun activists need to examine why people feel the need to use guns irresponsibly. As with many controversial issues, there seems to not be one particular way to address gun control. There have been certain implementations of law that attempt to lower gun violence. The anti-gun activists want guns strictly regulated, if not gone entirely, while pro-gun citizens feel they have the right to own whatever gun they feel necessary to defend themselves and, if need be, their country. There is also an apparent spotlight on the controversy with gun violence topping the media’s watch list. Because America’s society is constantly evolving, it is still unclear whether or not stricter gun laws would be more beneficial in stopping gun violence or if stricter laws infringing upon America’s Second Amendment would only make the problem worse. What was the response of gun right activists across the country? Yet, firearms supporters still insist that ownership of these weapons is a God given right guaranteed by our country’s constitution. They use the Second Amendment as a theoretical blanket making it acceptable to own any kind of weapon no matter the destructive capacity or threat to society. In discussions concerning the banning of these types of weapons, they predictably refer to the Second Amendment like it is the “are all ends all” argument for the continued availability of assault weapons; however, there are certain limits to all the articles of the Constitution. For example, even though the First Amendment ensures free speech, a person cannot enter a crowded building and falsely yell “Fire!” because it could lead to a threatening situation. The same applies to the Second Amendment. If there is a certain firearm or weapon that is overall threatening to society, is it wise to keep it in circulation? The real answer is no. Regardless of whether guns are a hobby or a defensive tool, the only person they truly benefits is the one holding it. The true purpose of an assault weapon is to kill. They do not only kill, but they are designed to kill with great efficiency and power. Supporters of guns often argue that people kill people, not guns. This is only partially true. While the human behind the gun may be using it irresponsibly, the gun is still half of the equation. It is the death dealing, life-taking tool behind the lost lives of so many Americans every year. Regardless of which side of the debate a person agrees with, it is a factual statement that something has to be done to help stop the increasing gun violence problem in the nation. While both sides have merit, society will never know if stricter gun laws will help curb the issue unless they are implemented into legislation. Tighter firearms regulations are not meant to disarm the American public, but to keep them safer. Is it not worth at least trying in order to protect the greater good of America.