America does not need Stricter Gun Control
History of Gun Control in America
The members of the Constitution had responsibility to develop the entire legal system in the post modern period. The Constitution was dragged into revolutionism at that time and they realized that United States did not have a proper army to defend it. This was the time when Phillips, Votey, and Howell (1976) spelled out the insurgence of the Second Amendment that mentioned for the Constitution that 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. The Second Amendment contains quite a few vague rudiments, including the ideas of a militia and a free state, however in the 21st century the concept of Free State is under scrutiny because gun control does not allow Americans to hold arms and ammunitions
The nations history has numerous cases which raise doubts towards the understanding of the Second Amendment that has many a times been raised in courts. The court had to face immense difficulties referring these cases whether it is the intention of the Constitution developers that is the main criteria for doubt or whether the Second Amendment should be altered according to the modern times. In the early 1990s, Brady Bill was the first contentious lawful ruling of the Second Amendment. The Brady Bill necessitated that anyone purchasing guns will be asked to provide total background info and wait for the verification till seven days. However, as soon as the summer of 1998, the Supreme Court discovered that the segment of the Brady Bill necessitating these checks on the purchaser were actually against the individual rights of the citizens and thus brought a halt to the Brady Bill. In an article published online, just 39 of Americans say U.S. must have stricter gun control, 50 is in opposition and 11 were not sure.
Arguments against stricter Gun Control Laws
Gun Laws do not ensure that criminals will not be able to obtain arms. Only the law abiding citizens will suffer.
Criminals will keep guns and will also find a way to Criminals intent on obtaining guns will find a way to evade laws. Beings criminals, laws dont mean anything to them anyways. The only sufferers will be the law abiding citizens who want to keep guns for their own safety. And further stricter controls over keeping guns would just make things worse for these citizens and would leave them merciless in the hands of the criminals.
Guns protect the rights and freedoms of the individual.
United States was founded when a large group of colonists stood up armed in front of the British regime. The government of Hitler in Germany and Stalins U.S.S.R. accepted this rule and captured all arms and ammunitions, without showing any oppression. The American citizens fear that if the government turns against them, what they would do to protect themselves. They do not want to be left at the mercy of local police as their defensive skills are criticized daily in Los Angeles and New York newspapers which have the highest number of shooting crimes .
If the current gun control policy is followed by the citizens of America there would no requirement of additional and stricter gun control.
Currently there are numerous laws governing the gun control policy. National Instant Check system is one of the many checks that congress has expended upon since 1993 to control purchase of arms by the wrong people. Yet, in spite of the hard work and documentation of laws, if has failed to ensure that all these laws are being thoroughly followed. The government needs to ensure that existing policies are followed in entirety before imposing additional and expensive policies.
It is the people who kill people, not the guns.
Notoriety is a crime itself. People who use guns for criminal activities dont respect the laws and values of American Laws and Regulations. Disrespect for the laws and regulations governing the gun control are to be blamed for. In Washington alone, law enforcement agencies need to spend more time in making citizens follow the government policies rather than imposing stricter laws. Higher education system and more responsible people in government to look up to and less elevation of violent behavior in the television media are the actual solutions to these problems.
Guns are sought to be the means of safety, their utilization depends on the citizens. Guns themselves cannot hurt people as the bullet cannot decide where to go. Criminals will manage to obtain guns even if the policies are tightened. Moreover they might use heavier arms if they are unable to obtain guns. Robbing or killing can be carried out with just a knife as well or other explosives. Also, stricter gun control will not work as the previously imposed laws did not do well on the American front.
The entire society benefits from guns nowadays, for example, the idea of installing stun guns in American Airlines plane in case there was an emergency. However, their usage was restricted to uncontrollable situations. September 11, raised a high security hazards for airlines and thus the cockpit doors were decided to be strengthened. If there were no security measures ever adapted such as the guns, such ideas and security threats would not be seriously thought of. America would be prone to heavier attacks if guns are banned.
In 1919 up to 1933 carrying, consuming or even selling alcohol was against the law. Some people believed that alcohol was a bad thing and that it caused people to do terrible things. To these people it seemed like a good idea at the time to make alcohol illegal. However, production of alcohol is still carried out and sold publicly. The prohibition of alcohol failed miserably. Currently we can see illegal drugs being banned. Now many of us know that most drugs that are illegal are bad to peoples health when used. However, when drugs like cocaine, heroin, marijuana, and meth are still being traded in America, illegally though but the restrictions could stop the consumption of drugs and innocent lives are lost almost every day in America.
In other words we can put it this way suppression of anything will only lead to curiosity among citizens and can lead to devastating consequences.
Incidents that develop this premise
1911, Turkey imposed gun control and almost 1.5 million Armenians lost their lives due to inability to defend themselves.
1929, Soviet Union imposed gun control and almost about 20 million lost their lives due to inability to defend themselves.
1938- Germany imposed gun control and about 6 million Jews lost their lives due to inability to defend themselves.
1935- China imposed gun control and about 20 million people died due to inability to defend themselves.
1964- Guatemala imposed gun control and almost 100,000 Mayan Indians lost their lives due to inability to defend themselves.
1970- Uganda imposed gun control and almost 300,000 Christians lost their lives due to inability to defend themselves.
1956- Cambodia imposed gun control and around 2,000,000 people, lost their lives due to inability to defend them. 1992-95 Bosnia-Herzegovina conflict 200,000 dead.
.
Can guns be considered as being a hazard to public
Suicide rates
Suicides are not slave to guns. Controlling the possession of guns will not limit Americas suicidal rate. Even though some suicides are just completely impetuous they would still be on the American front as there are other ways of committing suicides such as jumping of the roof, hanging down the ceiling or overdose of drugs.
Children and Guns
Children seem enthralled with guns. They play with G.I. Joe, which proclaims the use of heavy machine guns. This fascination leads them to getting hold of a gun if the parents hold one. For them it is toy out of a cartoon character and thus they cannot understand the disturbing consequences of these guns. Gun accidents are common among children nowadays due to increased violence on television and games. However, gun control laws cannot stop these disasters from being carried out instead it is the responsibility of the parents to keep their guns in a safe area and to educate children over the firearm safety.
An incident in the life of an American Citizen
A resident of Chicago, Ronyale White tried calling 911 four times in 2002 when her husband was attempting to strangle her to death. By the time the rescue team arrived they found Ronyale White dead on the floor. She was a silent proof of the failure of gun control. These stories have been many times repeated in the history of America especially in the state of Chicago. The ban imposed under the McDonald v. Chicago has led to a loss of many innocent lives as they do not have the permission to keep guns.
Gun control laws are hardly sustainable in America and have lost their support gradually. However U.S. Citizens also believe that restricted and limited gun controls should be imposed but ensured that they are being followed. The fact is, justice delayed is justice denied. And these bans, restrictions and wrongful convictions have led to a loss of many innocent lives. Numerous Ronyale Whites have suffered their right to possess a gun for their own safety is denied. Every day, armed gun owners successfully defend their lives all across the country. However, when we talk of lose control, at the same time we also hear miscellaneous stories of a shop owner killing an attacker a thief lethally shot at a car wash and a gun owner defending himself shot four attackers. If these people did not have guns, these cases would turn out differently. Guns save lives -- the lives of the people who are law abiding.
Almost 38,000 have died as a result of gun crimes every year since 1990. This constitutes all crimes incumbent of suicides and homicides. How can one possibly open the minds of the U.S. Constitution with the progression of homicides, suicides, provoked attacks, thefts, and accidents that constantly plague American life Apparently no one would go against the necessity of holding a gun.
Regardless of the truth that the Constitution allows American citizens the permission to carry guns, there are still many people who believe that they can do without it. We have seen and heard these debates on an off for a very long time. Media, courtrooms classes, wherever we go the argument against stricter gun control prevails and yet there is no solution or conclusion found for this effect.
Conclusion Recommendations
Intention and emotions play an important role in these discussions as similar to debates over the illegal drug wars. NRA is a private entity that plays an important role in fighting against gun control.
Arguments that are common against gun control are very straightforward and these arguments draw our attention towards the Second Amendment which allows private ownership of guns. It is argued that in the light of the new enactments, this right to own private guns is tampered with and thus American citizens are deprived of this right. However, since we witness numerous acts of crimes being committed with a gun we tend to ask if guns should be controlled.
The foremost argument that we discussed earlier is the right to protect your own self. Overlooking the fact that keeping a gun gives a sense of security. One tends to see that should we protect ourselves and our families and the obvious answer is yes. Many believe that if gun control is enforced, that violence will decline. Perhaps the reply to gun control lies inside responsibility and good regulations. Human personality in its own view is an unbalanced aspect that cannot be shaped or made to fit any framework.
Another premise that we discussed mentions that gun control will promote an illegal market for guns. They must realize that every time the need of an item is escalated there are restrictions on the purchase of the item and this will lead to illegal sale and purchase. Trafficking of drugs and ammunitions is a common issue and since the laws and policies in United States differ across states, it is possible that guns brought in the states with lesser gun control can be traded in other cities with stricter gun control laws. Therefore it is necessary that the existing laws and policies are actually looked into and imposed to ensure that they are followed in their entirety.
By restraining access to arms, the government takes away the protected and constitutional rights of the citizens to live safely. Constitutions 2nd Amendment guarantees the individuals right to carry guns and by taking this constitutional right away from them would equal to taking away their right to live. Citizens safety is the most important thing that the Constitution should consider.
The right to carry guns is not actually stated as an individual right in the Second Amendment but is rather applicable only to the armed forces. When this Amendment was produced, it was to make sure the resident armed forces the right to accept arms in order to defend and serve their society as a complete entity. The armed force was seen as a public responsibility, and would measure up to todays National Guard.
Ethnically, many Americans decide to overlook facts that entail that stricter gun control laws would affect America adversely. Hypothetically, America could take on a gun ban like Japans. But that ban would be totally unfamiliar to our culture, which for more than three hundred years has had the most free, most unrestrained gun culture. Japans gun laws are part of a totalitarian attitude of administration that is basically at chances with Americas customs of freedom. Such laws should be taken away from our country. When taking this accepted vision in mind, it would come into view that it may not really matter if America accepts or not that stricter laws will be effective in reducing gun violence. Americans are obstinate, and unluckily we will never give up altering the second amendment for the gun violence to reduce.
Japan in many ways is similar to United States as far as the population is concerned, proves that stricter gun-control laws will have very small effect on reducing crimes related to gun violence. Japan has a law for possession of guns which states that only hunters, armed forces and law enforcement agencies are allowed to hold guns. However, the main premise of gun control being effective in Japan because it has to do with people management. Americans, used to their own customs of liberty, would not follow Japan system of controlling guns and people at the same time.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment