Against Gun Control Essay
The problem of gun control is hotly debated nowadays. 50% of the population are for it explaining that having a gun provides them some protection. Because of various reasons our justice system cannot always protect us which is why the majority of people is looking for some other ways of staying safe. However, a gun is still a weapon. Despite the fact that most people want to possess it in order to be on the safe side, we are aware of a lot of accidents when innocent people were hurt unintentionally. For this reason, more and more people nowadays are supporting the complication of the procedure of getting a gun. Too many factors indicate its negative aspects. Of course, some of you might say that it is not the gun that kills people; it is people itself. You are absolutely right but the fact that those people have the gun is what leads them to such dreadful actions. We should take measures in order to reduce the amount of guns people possess, otherwise it may lead to a great number of tragedies. Rage, jealousy and anger are strong motifs and before you know it, somebody has already hurt the other person.
The government should be very careful deciding whether this person should or should not be allowed to carry a gun. Our reality is harsh and what seemed to be a measure of protection may turn into brutality.
All in all, the topic is quite complex and requires a lot of thinking. If you are currently dealing with an against gun control essay, you’d better entrust it to the team of our professional writers who know to provide you with a superb paper – Order Original Gun Control Essay.
Essay on Gun Control
There have been arguments regarding the gun control in the United States where some people have been on the idea that laws on gun control should be enhanced while others supported the idea that they should be scrapped and there should no be rules governing gun control in the country. The importance on gun control rules was emphasized due to the increase in insecurity whose main attribute is gun violence raised by the people who are in possession of the guns. The second amendment allows citizens to have the right to bear arms and can use them for self defense. Therefore, when there are fights against people possessing firearms, it is an indication that people are trying to defeat the point that gave birth to the second amendment. There has also been an argument that violence will also be experienced in the absence of the guns. There are other weapons that can be used to perpetrate violence, and other factors should be considered in controlling violence apart from confiscating guns and bringing other laws that control gun possession. For instance, there was reported a case where a young man stabbed his fellow student with a screwdriver in a high school. He did not need a gun to commit the murder, yet there was crime in the school. People are also denied freedom of some activities such as hunting. For many people, hunting is a hobby, and a gun is used in hunting the wild animals. When there are gun control laws, it is very obvious that they are deprived of their interest in their hobby. For these reasons, there should no be gun control laws, as people should be allowed to use the guns at their discretion (Dixon, 2013).
Most Americans cling to the second amendment that allows citizens to hold firearms wherever they go for their own safety. Most people also believe that the second amendment was placed so that the citizens would be protected from the tyrannical government that seemed to keep people in fear. People would have the power to rebel in case the government introduced dictatorial policies for their people. However, though this was not the main aim why people were issued with guns, it served as a purpose as the power of the government would be regulated in a way that the people would be given a chance to make their own ideas and also be given a voice in the government. This is because of the power they were believed to have after they were given the go- ahead to possess the firearms.
The second amendment states that the right of people to keep their arms should not be infringed by any means. The amendment mentions a well- regulated militia which is a phrase that means a group of citizens that act in position of an army. It continues to describe that it is necessary to the security of a free state. In this phrase, it means that the group will be in the frontline in making sure that it meets the goals and the interests of the citizen army. The main objective of the citizen army is to protect the best interests of the country, as well as, protecting the government also from foreign intervention. In the last bit of the amendment, the citizen army is required to bear and keep their arms for America’s security. This means that when the gun control laws are being introduced, the main intention of introducing the second amendment is being assumed. This means that the country would be left at the stake of only the military and the citizens would not have the power of protecting their government, as well as, the best interests of their nation (Lott 18-25).
Another main reason why the second amendment was made was that the South would be able to control the slaves. Guns would be essential in helping carry out slavery in the South at ease. Therefore, state militias served as slave patrols where they had to be given the mandate and responsibility to hold guns so that they would be able to control the slaves. The second amendment was also made because of the rebellions that used to take place in the country. For example, the whiskey rebellion caused the government to revoke the amendment as a way of controlling the militias in helping stop the rebellion. The farmers were rebelling against the government for imposing a new tax, yet it had not been there previously. When the amendment was made, room for rebel had not been created against the government. However, such rebellions were experienced when the government was not in a position to meet certain needs of the people or it acted in such a way that people viewed as selfish or had corrupt intentions. For this reason, the state has been enjoying its democratic right because rebellions and demonstrations are respected because the government realizes the power within the people. If such power had not been vested in the people, it would be difficult in the United States to stage rebellions and demonstrations in fight for human rights and freedom. Imposing gun control laws in the country is, therefore, a way of curtailing freedom in the United States, as the people may lack the voice and the authority they had previously (Bijlefeld 78-92).
There has also been an argument that it is not the guns that kill people, but it is the people themselves who kill other people. In this context, those against the gun controls argue that it is a personal initiative for a criminal to engage in crime, whether he holds a gun or not. In this regard, he does not have to possess gun for him to hold a gun. More comparisons are made between other weapons that are used to kill people and the guns that are always blamed for being used in killing people. People use crude weapons including screwdrivers, knives, swords or any metallic objects if they have the intention to kill other people. The gun just necessitates and quickens the process, and they argue that the killing would still have taken place, in the absence of the gun. Therefore, before placing the gun control laws as a measure to reduce violence and crime, more research should be indulged and there should be other actions that ought to be taken as a way of reducing the violence. For example, most people who commit these crimes are usually in the influence of high drug intoxication. It is these drugs that will make them use the guns or other weapons around them in committing violence.
The best way to help reduce violence in such a person would not be confiscating the gun he is carrying, but rehabilitating him as a way to reduce the drug use in him. This is because even after taking the gun, the drug effects may show him to use other weapons to commit the crime. However, when he has been led out of using the drugs, he will not use the gun wrongly, and will continue keeping and bearing it for the right purpose, which is self- defense and protecting the interests of the nation, as outlined in the constitution (Dixon, 2013).
Ideally, the legislations that have been created for gun control are meant for the criminals. It goes without saying that criminals do not follow the law, and making such legislation does not stop them from committing their crimes. Criminals are very conversant with the laws and they intentionally break them so that they get what they want. The new laws that have been created for gun control are, therefore, going to affect the citizens who are not criminals and are held illegible to carry the guns. This would be unfair to them because the criminals will always have their own ways to hide and use the guns even when the new laws are being put into practice. With this in mind, the rate of crime and violence is likely to shoot up since it is in the knowledge of the criminals that people are not holding guns, and they can, therefore, use their guns more freely than they would have used them when people are holding guns (Spitzer 102-116).
It has also been concluded that gun laws do not work in any way. This is in reference of earlier legislations that had been placed in hopes that they would be able to regulate gun violence. For instance, there was a law that existed between 1994 and 2004. The law required that no one was allowed to carry guns, but it did not work as gun violence did not reduce, as expected. This shows that there is little or no correlation between gun violence and the enactment of the ban on firearm holding in the U.S. there are other more factors that should be considered if the country is committed in stopping gun violence. The legislation itself had loopholes, which the criminals used in keeping and using the guns wrongly. Other factors that may have a higher degree of correlation with gun violence are factors such as having mental illness and using drugs wrongly. When the government concentrates on confiscating guns on a measure to reduce gun violence, it will lose the track and violence will still be on the rise. It should focus on other solutions, and gun control should come last when other measures are working.
Therefore, it has been clearly indicated why it is important in letting people hold guns and why gun legislation should not be enacted. More safety and security of the state will be ensured when the government embarks on other measure to help stop gun violence in the U.S. Researchers have already found out that there is negative correlation between gun legislation and gun violence. However, when the government embarks on research of how to stop gun violence through other measures such as rehabilitating people with mental illnesses and drug addicts, a permanent solution is being found for people in the nation, and gun violence will reduce since there is a substantial positive correlation between gun violence and drug abuse and mental illnesses.
So, you can order this essay and hire our writers for rewrite your essay. Marvel Essay – great place for getting your original papers for any assignments.