Gun control laws were constructed to reduce the overall crimes that are involved with guns. The purpose behind gun control laws was to determine who can purchase/sell firearms, carry/store guns and to reduce and prevent gun related deaths. Gun control laws were deemed necessary because some believe perceived enforcing gun control laws would . According to Richard Perez-Pena in his article, “Gun Control” he claims that gun control is broad term that covers any sort of restriction on what kinds of firearms can be sold and bought, who can possess or sell them, where and how they can be stored or carried, what duties a seller has to vet a buyer, and what obligations both the buyer and the seller have to report transactions to the government. I support this definition because it covers a good amount of what gun control is about, however it does not mention another part of gun control which is to limit or decrease crime and violence related to guns.
In Tony Cook’s article, “Indiana to blame for Chicago’s gun violence” he states that Indiana and other states with few gun restrictions are to blame for Chicago’s homicide problem. Cook makes this claim because later in his article he informs the audience that Chicago police have been complaining for a long time that there has been a steady stream of illegal firearms from neighboring states such as Indiana, where gun control laws are much weaker. From this evidence Cook has provided, if neighboring states would work together they could prevent this from occurring and lower Chicago’s homicide problem. It is possible because once neighboring states with fewer gun restrictions prevent people for importing guns into Chicago there would be fewer guns to commit crimes with ultimately lower the homicide problem.
According to S.H. Blannelberry’s article, “New Jersey Slaps Felony Gun Charge on Another Law-Abiding Citizen” he claims ” Sgt. Ray Hughes, a correction officers in Pennsylvania, was headed home after dinner with his wife in Atlantic City when they were hit by a drunk driver. Even though he was the victim, Hughes became a criminal – he’s now facing a felony charge for bringing his gun to New Jersey.” From the encounter that Sgt. Hughes experienced it is all the more reason for neighboring states to work together. In Pennsylvania the gun restrictions are considerably lower compared to New Jersey and this is not the only time where people have been convicted coming from states with fewer gun restrictions into strict gun control law states. In Joshua Rhett Miller’s article, “‘Honest mistake’ leads to Philly mother facing three years on gun charge” he states “Shaneen Allen,27, faces more than three years in prison if convicted after mistakenly entered New Jersey, where she was dropped for a traffic violation and found in possession of a handgun loaded with holly point bullets.” Later in the same article it was revealed Allen was in possession of a permit for her firearm, however the permit was not transferable to New Jersey. From the quote it reveals another incident where someone has been wrongfully convicted. In both occasions the accused has been pulled over for something that is unrelated to gun charges, unfortunately ending with gun charges. In order to prevent this wrongful convicts neighboring states must accept permits from surrounding states even if they have fewer gun control restrictions.
In Pro Con’s article, “Gun Control,” Pro Con claims that five women are murdered with guns every day in the United States. The study later stated a woman’s of being murdered increases 500% if a gun’s present during a domestic dispute. From this evidence it shows how even the present of a gun can alter the outcome of domestic disputes. If gun control is intended to be in control of who are the buyers and sellers of firearms, and who are eligible to possess firearms then it should be emphasis that guns should not be present during disputes between spouses and that guns should be tucked away out of reach to prevent the dispute from getting worse. In addition to domestic disputes the presents of a gun has impacted suicides as well. Pro Con has found that in between 1999 and 2013 there were 270,237 firearm suicides in the United States, accounting for all about 52% of all suicides during those years. From this evidence it reveals how the present of a gun impacts a lot of situations. a suitable alternate solution would be simply to keep these guns away from these occasions because without their presence a person wouldn’t able to use a gun to either murder someone or commit suicide.
Pro Con found that countries who have more restrictive gun laws then the U.S. have a lower gun homicide and suicide rates. From this information it reveals how other countries found a solution by enforcing more restrictive gun laws because with more restrictions there will be less guns and as a result less gun related crime and violence. Furthermore Pro Con revealed that approximately 50% of unintentional fatal shootings were self-inflicted. This evidence continues to support the reasoning for U.S. to follow suite with other countries because within other countries this is less likely to occur. Since other countries have fewer guns and more restrictive gun laws.
Pro Con has revealed that gun control laws can lead to preventing injustices from occurring because when looking into some cases it has been found that legally own guns have been frequently stolen and used by criminals. The solution of this reoccurring problem has been addressed because earlier in my work, I suggested that if guns were tucked away it would alter the outcome of situations. This would fix the solution because if done correctly there would be no guns in site for the criminals to steal. Pro Con has showed that high capacity magazines were used in at least 50% of the 62 mass shootings between 1982 and 2012. When high capacity magazines were used in mass shootings, the death rate rose 63% and the injury rate rose 156%. From the evidence provided it shows how the average civilian has few reasons to possess high magazine firearms, since most of them result in mass shootings.
People have debated what the root of the problem is behind gun related crimes, wither the gun control laws have been too strict or have they been too loose. In doing some research, I discovered some articles that stated how gun control laws have not been the problem, rather the factors around gun control laws are why gun related crimes still occur. Some of these factors would include the location of the states, as well as the guns that are involved in the crimes that are being committed. Furthermore, there are articles were people make the claim that how the idea that gun control is the problem is considerably appalling because the cause is other factors than gun control itself.
People have proposed that over the years gun homicide has decreased. This comparison was the back bone for Mark J Perry’s article, “Chart of the day: More guns, less gun violence between 1993 and 2013” Perry provides the audience with a graph comparing guns per person and gun homicide rate. As the graph goes from the 90s to the 2000s the guns per person increases while the homicide rate has depleted. Perry uses another graph using the number of total firearms and gun homicide rates to inform the audience that this is not a mere coincidence that there is a correlation between possessing more guns and gun homicide. The reasoning behind this correlation is because states have recognized licenses and permits for firearms. Due to states acknowledging people’s licenses for firearms, it has allowed people to feel more secure and comfortable with possessing a firearm. They are able to feel more secure because now that more and more states are recognizing licenses from other states. Now people won’t have to worry about being charged with possession of firearms or being wrongfully convicted with any gun related charges.
Additional factors that Perry mentions in his article, “Chart of the day: More guns, less gun violence between 1993 and 2013” are that more police officers on the beat better making greater use of computers, a decline in alcohol consumption, less lead exposure and an improving an economy. In terms of the effects of police officers improving and using computers more wisely, it has been revealed that police officers have a good amount of technology targeted to track down crimes and find the criminal. Certain pieces of technology are specifically made for gun related crimes such has whenever a gun shot is fired the police are notified as soon as the shot goes of. The technology they notifies the police because the device is set to a certain frequency to only hear gun shots and once they pick up a gun shot in the area it pin points that area and relays this information back to the police station.
Another technology that helps aid police officers is their mobile digital communicator because it has allowed officers to keep in contact with not only each other but the station as well. This is very useful because it allows officers to call for back up or if an incident should arise the station could contact a nearby officer and inform to get to the crime scene sooner. This would decrease gun homicides because of this technology it reduces the amount of time for homicides to occur because the sooner the police officers can get to the scene and control the situation and prevent anyone from dying the less time there is for a gun homicide to occur. A decline in alcohol impacts the gun homicides as well because if people are intoxicated a variety of things could happen when they are in possession of a firearm such as an accidental shooting or altercations. People tend to much more clumsy and careless when drinking and if someone were to obtain a firearm it is much more possible an accidental shooting would arise then if they were sober because of the clumsy and carelessness people tend to show. Less lead exposure has effected the gun homicide because when looking back at the ammunition the police officers used it was said they tended to use more bullets containing lead. Lead poisoning has killed numerous people and when police officers used bullets with lead in them, even if someone were to survive the bullet shot the wound with lead within it would result in their death. By switching to non lead ammunition there is less lead exposure and as a result less deaths when people are shot by police.
Some consider issuing more guns to the community would increase the gun rate, however similarly to Perry’s article, Jeffery Goldberg supports supplying more guns. In Jeffery Goldberg’s article, “The Case For More Guns (and More Gun Control)” he claims that concealed carry permit holders commit crimes at a lower rate than the general population. Furthermore, Goldberg reveals that in today’s society the number of concealed carry permits is at its highest while the homicide rate is at the lowest it’s ever been in four decades. The reason behind why carrying a firearm impacts the homicide rate is because the chain reaction law abiding citizens hold with carry firearms. The chain reaction is because people can deter criminals by making it riskier for people to commit crimes, and one way to make it riskier is to create the impression among the criminal population that the law abiding citizen they want to target may have a gun. The deeper meaning to the chain reaction is that in order to prevent criminals from being criminals is to make it riskier for them to commit these crimes. By granting citizens to carry firearms, who intend to use them for the right reasons such as stopping a criminal then that would make the criminal reconsider if they want to commit the crime when the citizens who are at the scene of the crime are armed as well. Another reasoning for issuing more guns, at for self defense purposes. In particular situations such as robberies and shootings were guns are commonly used, if the victims were able to carry firearms they would be able to protect themselves. The victims would not be stuck between trying to hide behind a counter or doing whatever the criminal says in order to stay a live. By arming themselves, the victims would be able to defend themselves against the criminals.
Blannelberry, S.H. “New Jersey Slaps Felony Gun Charge on Another Law-Abiding Citizen – GunsAmerica Digest.” GunsAmerica Digest. Fox, 18 Feb. 2016. Web. 07 Dec. 2016. <Felony Gun Charge/>.
Dube, Arindrajit. “Cross-Border Spillover: U.S. Gun Laws and Violence in Mexico | American Political Science Review | Cambridge Core.” Cambridge Core. American Political Science Association, 10 July 2013. Web. 08 Dec. 2016. <Cross border Gun Violence between U.S. and Mexico>.
Goldberg, Jeffery. “The Case for More Guns (and More Gun Control).” The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, Dec. 2012. Web. 10 Dec. 2016. <More Guns More Gun Control/>.
“Gun Control – ProCon.org.” ProConorg Headlines. Pro Con, 28 June 2016. Web. 07 Dec. 2016. <Gun Control Pros and Cons/>.
Ludwig, Jens. “Concealed-gun-carrying Laws and Violent Crime: Evidence from State Panel Data ☆.” Concealed-gun-carrying Laws and Violent Crime: Evidence from State Panel Data. ScienceDirect, 21 Nov. 1998. Web. 08 Dec. 2016. <Concealed carry gun laws>.
Miller, Joshua Rhett. “‘Honest Mistake’ Leads to Philly Mother Facing Three Years on Gun Charge.” Fox News. FOX News Network, 16 July 2014. Web. 08 Dec. 2016. <Honest Mistake Leads Mother to 3 year gun charge>.
Perry, Mark J. “Chart of the Day: More Guns, Less Gun Violence between 1993 and 2013.” The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 4 Dec. 2015. Web. 10 Dec. 2016. <More Guns Less Violence between 1993 and 2013/>.
PÉrez-peÑa, Richard. “Gun Control Explained.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 06 Oct. 2015. Web. 07 Dec. 2016. <http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/07/us/gun-control-explained.html?_r=0>.
Soften, Kim. “To Reduce Suicides, Look at Guns.” The Washington Post. WP Company, 13 July 2013. Web. 08 Dec. 2016. <To Reduce Suicide, Look at Guns>.
Star, Tony Cook The Indianapolis. “Is Indiana to Blame for Chicago’s Gun Violence?” USA Today. Gannett Satellite Information Network, 28 Oct. 2015. Web. 07 Dec. 2016. <Indiana to Blame for Chicago Gun Violence>.