Pro Gun Essay

Everybody knows that gun rights are one of the most debated and controversial topics facing America today. Guns have been part of the American society since the founding of the United States in 1776. When the colonies were demanding their freedom from a tyrannical rule. It was written down that all men who were able to own and carry a gun should exercise that right. They were needed to defend their homes and the land they loved. Many Americans are still gun proponents to this day and it has become a growing issue that have people who are adamant about their side of the argument being the only way to handle the situation. With both sides exploiting situations to make small gains and create a hostile environment. This does not allow for the issue to be addressed and fixed. Gun rights should not be infringed upon by the government. A ban would be hard to enforce, would criminalize otherwise law abiding citizens, and firearms make people feel safe. Most of the debate about gun rights stems from the second amendment in the Bill of Rights. The second...show more content... Guns should be kept out of the hands of criminals who use them for the wrong reasons. This is where the real issue lies. In 2001, 59% of all homicides in LA and 53% in Chicago were gang related (Geer). This is an alarming statistic showing that majority of the murders are committed by gang members and criminals. They are already partaking in criminal activities so a ban on firearms would not even affect them. They do not carry legal weapons already so a new law enforcing a ban on at least handguns would not faze them. Criminals would still carry on with their normal activities. In 2004, among state prison inmates who possessed a gun at the time of offense, less than 2% obtained their firearm illegally (Alters). There needs to be a better system in place that can keep guns out of the hands of felons who intend to do harm with a Get more content

Pro Gun Control Debate

As we engulf ourselves in politics for the election year, there has been frequent source of debate between the candidates; gun control. In the words of Patrick J. Charles of Britannica, gun control is "...politics, legislation,and enforcement of measures intended to restrict access to, the possession of, or the use of arms, specifically firearms." Even taking away the political importance, gun control is a hot topic that is in every Americans mind as fear for personal safety is on the rise. This has been created by increased media attention and coverage of mass shootings, which seem to occur more frequently as time goes on. This has lead to the question: can we use laws and enforcement to reduce the violence? It shows creating laws to control or ban the purchasing and use of firearms is the most probable to be the solution to reducing gun violence while coinciding with proper firearm education.

The event that sparked the modern debate of gun control occurred on July 20, 2012 when James Holmes used weapons with high capacity magazines to open fire on a sold out movie theatre in Aurora, Colorado, and accumulated 74 casualties, including 12 deaths. Colorado unfortunately is no stranger...show more content...

Bans of certain classifications of weapons prevent mass carnage from happening easily. Rigorous background checks ensure no little detail slips through the crack for any individual trying to obtain a firearm. Along with proper gun education to prevent accidental casualties. There is a way to stop events such as Sandy Hook from happening, it just requires cooperation from the citizens and the proper knowledge of how future legislation would work. Although improbable, the United states can ban together, give up their bigotry and ignorance and create the solution that ensures a safer America for the

Gun control is a vital necessity to the welfare of our nation. Many people out there are supporting the "anti– gun control cause" with the excuse of "self–defense". I believe that not everyone will handle a gun for self–defense. The possession of a gun is a sign of power. One of the bigger ambitions that one has is to have power and the easier it is to obtain a gun; the faster a criminal will gain power over an innocent person. When one is in possession of a gun, that person has complete control of their actions and may act upon the weapon however the person may please even if they know that their action will cause harm to defense–less people. There are many deaths caused by guns out there that could...show more content...

Teens are not "strong" enough. I always tell my sister that if she is not strong enough to control herself, she will never be strong enough to control others and will resort to the easiest ways to "eliminate" that person. She will do whatever is easier to get that stone out of her way rather than talking things over and controlling the situation.

Not so long ago my neighbor's daughter was killed by her ex. I am positive that this could have been stopped. I do not know how the man obtained the gun, but I am sure it was through an illegal way. He is not a policeman, he worked at a supermarket. He does not live in a violent area. He lived in Bergenfield with his girlfriend. The man did go buy a gun a day before because he knew that he wanted to kill his girlfriend. The saddest part is that he killed the girl because she wanted to break up with him. This is what we want for our country? For people to kill their former boyfriends/girlfriends because that person ended the relationship. This tragedy could have not been stopped by the girl having a gun with her. In fact, she might have had to face years of prison for murder and carrying a gun without a license. Sure, gun control will not eliminate violence or completely prevent criminals from obtaining guns. Criminals have their ways to go around the law but by having gun control the murders and assaults with gun will lessen. I know that everyone has rights but the 2nd amendment is misinterpreted.

Persuasive Pro Gun Control Essay

The pro gun control debate is sided by the more liberal organizations. Whether they are conspicuously discernible organizations for gun control, or even just more liberal news sources, be sure you ken their political standing afore taking their data as whole truth. Even an organization such as NPR cannot be held as 100% reliable, because of their generally liberal agendas. The gun control debate facts for the anti control side are just as suspect. Again, the NRA and its constituents are perhaps the most vocal in this debate. But generally any Republican or right–wing organization is going to have some remotely investment in keeping gun control down. Any of their facts and information are going to be hyperbolized or skewed in order to make gun

Get more content

The media talks about it. People start protests over it. The newly elected president already has his plans on its future in the United States. It's the controversial issue on whether or not guns are safe for the United States. Pro gun control activists believe putting restrictions on guns would benefit the country tremendously. However, the anti–gun control people do not want the government taking over their second amendment right. Many believe that gun legislation should be put into place to prevent crime, while others believe that putting laws on guns interferes with citizens' constitutional second amendment rights. Many consider the second amendment still functional in today's society, however, the opposing side claims the use of guns today...show more content...

The worry many people have nowadays is that guns will end up in the wrong hands. Hands of those who commit crimes or the mentally ill who cannot handle certain situations well. Another concern anti–gun activists have is trying to protect society from gun violence. Recently there have been mass shootings in schools, public events, and even work places. The concern of safety by citizens is rising after these horrific events happen. It's the reasoning behind why those who speak about restricting guns have an opinion like that because anything is unpredictable. Likewise, ProConorg Headlines continues to discuss the restrictions on guns as a necessity. Conservatives will dispute that opinion and claim guns are essential for self defense. However, it is claimed, "Of the 84,495,500 property crimes committed between 2007 and 2011, 0.12% of victims (103,000) protected themselves with a threat of use or use of a firearm" ("Gun Control – ProCon.org."). Most liberals would argue that it is rarely heard of that a gun was used for self defense. They take these statistics to prove guns aren't often used as a self defense method to those who claim citizens need guns for safety and protect themselves. It's a very small percentage of the household crimes that a gun was used in self defense. The other part of the percentage of crimes are the ones who are committed by people who are looking to do crime. These stats give them evidence in their argument that we do not need guns in our society because they cause more harm than they do involving us protecting ourselves. In addition to those who are against guns, they feel as if the intention of the second amendment was stretched way beyond its meaning. According to the Progressive Cynic, it is said, "In order to do this, these gun

Gun control is a controversial topic that arises frequently in the United States. This old issue resurfaces whenever a gun related crime such as a school shooting, terrorist attack, or police shooting happens. The goal with gun control, which is more commonly pressed by Democrats, is to make the purchasing of a firearm more difficult to attain. This common problem ofgun control is something that is constantly on citizen's minds and has been for years. It's current legal status is somewhat tricky to understand as it is different state–wide. While there are some rules and regulations to follow in order to get a gun, some are not seen as solid ways to control anticipated buyers. Therefore, there is a high demand to make the regulations of purchasing...show more content...

Some people argue that when it states "a well regulated militia" that it doesn't pertain to citizens. Others argue that the clarification of a militia is not stated and well enough to define who can and can not have the right to bear arms. Ever since the second amendment there has always been a problem with gun control. People use guns for a plethora of reasons. A Gallup poll showed that 36% of gun owners used their firearms for hunting, 21% used theirs for target shooting and 60% of gun owners had their firearms for protection against crime. With most gun owners using their guns as protection it poses a question of why do civilians feel the need to constantly have protection, or why they don't believe that the police are enough. Current Kansas gun laws do not require a permit to buy or carry a firearm, however these laws vary state to state. Basic gun laws require the buyer to be 21 years of age in order to buy a handgun and 18 years of age to buy a long barreled hunting guns, and each buyer has to be processed into an extensive background check. Proponents of gun control want to make such laws more strict in order to attain a gun by means of background checks, while some want to ban the usage of guns

Get more content

Guns can protect people, their freedom, and their nation! Guns should not be taken away from innocent and law abiding citizens. Guns have been used to protect and fight for our country, they have been used to provide food and are a great recreational pass time. We used Guns to win America's freedom and keep it. Guns are not bad, most of the time guns are used for self defense. The second Amendment give the citizens of the United states the right to bear arms. This allows the citizens of the U.S. to be able to protect themselves from corrupt governments, other countries, and bad people."The NRA states that guns are used for self defence around 2.5 million times a year". Progun control groups believe that gun control will end gun...show more content...

Most of the time when there is a shooting people say that guns killed the people; This is not true, people kill people, guns are just the tool used to do it. Guns are just tools they are used by people they can not act on their own. We already have gun laws in place, like having to be a certain age to buy a gun and you having to have a special license to own pistols and Automatic guns along with proper background checks. Guns can and do protect people, their freedom, and their nation! Guns should not be taken away from innocent and law abiding citizens. More mass murders and killings of innocent people have occured because of citizens not being armed then all the anti gun arguments. Some examples of this would be Germany in 1938 the government rounded up all the guns from 1939 through 1945 in result 13 million civilians were rounded up and killed. They were unable to defend themselves or their families and property against a government turn evil. Guatemala established gun control and took the guns away from people and from 1964 through 1981 100,000 people unable to protect themselves were rounded up and killed. You see this again in Uganda in 1970, cambodia in 1956, and China in 1935. So all through history you can see how taking guns away from the civilians have turned bad. Guns keep people safe yes they can be used to hurt or kill someone but the truth Is most of the time guns save Get more content

Some suggest that our nation requires more gun control. I say these claims are absurd! I feel that it is common sense that a criminal or any individual determined to do harm will not follow this ridiculous new law. The only results that could come of it is more illegal gun trade and innocent individuals being stripped of their right to defend themselves as well as other by standers. Doing so will without a doubt provide non law abiding citizens with the idea that they hold power over the innocent

Get more content

"When Governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny." (Beck 35). This quote is from one of the greatest men in the history of the United States of America, Thomas Jefferson, the father of the Declaration of Independence, and the third President of the United States. The validity of his statement is not only historical, but as pertinent today as it was when spoken anew. It is learned in schools across the nation, although the importance of the words depends on the teacher, school, and region of the country. During the revolutionary period, King George learned this same concept the hard way, "...an armed populace is a populace that will not be pushed around." ...show more content...

Investigating all ten of the amendments to the Bill of Rights, only the second specifically ensures that this be expected. The only true power that the people of a nation can have over their government is the ability to remove it if it becomes more powerful than the people. This is a belief that is continuously defended or confronted around the world and throughout history. Unfortunately, when the people have an army standing between them and the government, the means to fight become very important, albeit difficult. The federal government of the United States, when they attempt to create laws on gun control, does not have the law on their side. Thanks to the founding fathers of the United States, this right is ensured through time. They understood that any form of government can become corrupt and eventually the people will need a legal way to ensure that they can take back their personal liberties if it becomes necessary.

In the period of time before the United States became the young country it is today, in order to secure and protect established borders, the colonists were in need of the assistance of the standing army of King George, the British Red Coats. As soon as the colonists decided to revolt excessive taxation and other mandates being imposed on towns and states,

Get more content

"Shall Not Be Infringed"

The Right to Own a Gun

Are you willing to sit back and become a victim of violent crime or allow the government to tamper with your civil liberties? In recent years, anti–gun politicians have attempted to control guns in the name of crime prevention this is an assault on the Second Amendment rights of US citizens . The Second Amendmentstates, " A well regulated Militia being necessary to the Security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Not only did our Founding Fathers focus their debate on the right of people to keep and bear arms, they devoted energy to encouraging future generations to defend theses freedoms. In defense of gun ownership, Alexander Hamilton said, "If...show more content...

FBI statistics accumulated on a countrywide level show that in states that have strict gun control laws, there are higher crime rates. If gun control laws have any effect, it may be to increase crime! For instance, New Jersey adopted what sponsors described as "the most stringent gun law" in the nation in 1966; two years later the murder rate was up 46 percent and the reported robbery rate had nearly doubled. In 1968, Hawaii imposed a series of increasingly harsh measures, and its murder rate, then a low 2.4 per 100,000 per year, tripled to 7.2 by 1977. In opposition, states with liberal gun carry laws have much lower crime rates. In Florida the homicide rate dropped from 37 percent above the national average to 3 percent below the national average after the state changed its concealed carry law in 1987. In 1987, Florida's murder rate was 11.4 per 100,000 compared with the national rate of 8.2. By 1992, the national rate had risen to 9.3 per 100,000 while Florida's had dropped to 9, and in 1993, it continued to drop another .3 to 8.7 per 100,000. Between 1987 and 1992, rape increased nationally by 14.4 percent. But in Florida, it increased only 2.9 percent and in 1993 rape in Florida decreased .2 percent. Florida issued 204,108 concealed carry licenses during the first six and half years

Get more content

A shooting here; a shooting there; a consistent day to day event heard in the daily papers and on the news stations on TV. New media are announcing a shooting someplace. Regardless of whether the shootings are intentional or unintentional; they are occurring all over the United States. In today's society,gun control is essential; stricter federal laws must be enacted to save lives. Individual states' laws are not sufficient to reduce deaths caused by guns In any case, in today's society, weapon brutality is a sparking debate and controversy on how to control gun violence. Anyone who thinks that we have enough gun control laws is either NRA, or severely misguided. All across the nation, a large number of laws and directions have been...show more content...

All guns must be banned. All guns. Get rid of all weapons in homes, and in the city, and, however much as possible.Not in light of San Bernardino, or whichever mass shooting may fly up next. Whenever there's a mass shooting in the U.S., members of Congress refuse to bear in mind discussing gun control, guaranteeing that gun control advocates politicize the issue at a time of national grieving. "Now isn't the time," they say. It's been a long time since the mass shooting in Newtown, Conn.; 18 months since the mass shooting in Orlando, Fl.; and over 2 months since Las Vegas. Would it be a good idea for us to not ask the Republicans in Congress: "Is now the time? Furthermore, if not now, when? In one more year? An additional five