Introduction
Gun control has been a contentious and divisive subject and, as a result, a long-running social debate. The United States (US) continues to attract attention regarding the legal acknowledgment of people’s rights to bear and possess guns, even while policies of greater gun control have gained widespread acceptance. People’s opinions on the appropriate interventions and remedies to such a problem have become more divisive as a result of the recent school shootings in enormous numbers (LeSavage, 2019).
While another group opposes gun control laws and regulations, several individuals advocate additional legislation and more controls on firearms. Gun control opponents contend that regulating firearms would never remedy the problems created by these weapons, including mass massacres and crimes. Thus, the definition of gun control encompasses restrictions on who may own or trade firearms and the types of guns that may be provided and obtained. Since mass shootings have resulted in enormous losses of life and have damaged America’s reputation, it is necessary to lift the firearm ban, since it is doing more harm than good.
Mass Shooting
The debate over gun control and the need for stronger laws in the US is now quite popular. Although many persons convicted of federal gun offenses are not harmful criminals, federal gun crimes are frequently seen as being perpetrated by dangerous criminals (Charles & Garrett, 2022). A lack of urgency or clarity in the debate over policies that help to avoid deaths brought on by the accessibility of weapons is due to America’s tenacious defense of the right to carry arms, as well as the country’s ownership of over 393 million civilian-owned firearms (Ingraham, 2018). Stricter gun control laws should be developed to lessen the social effects of gun violence, such as medical costs, society’s safety, and the occurrence of violence in private situations.
Guns and gun ownership mostly cause mass shootings in the US. Mass shootings bring forth a terrible cycle of grief and hatred. Gun control aims to limit the purchase of specific weapons, particularly assault rifles. According to proponents of gun regulation, high-capacity magazines allow for the constant firing of firearms without reloading. This increases the possibility that they may hurt more people instantly. Consequently, this has not been effective in reducing killings and mass shootings.
Handguns are the most often used weapon in mass shootings in the United States. Gun regulation, however, is far tighter elsewhere than in the US; for example, in Canada, since the 1890s, handguns have been subject to the law (Schwartz, 2022). When Bill C-51 was passed in Canada in the late 1970s, it established a licensing system, required background checks, and outlawed the possession of fully automatic firearms (Schwartz, 2022). As a result, restrictions on firearms are only making mass shootings worse. Furthermore, handguns are the most common type of firearm criminals use due to their affordability and ease of concealment. Therefore, restricting firearms is a vague idea that only seeks to assist a select few while harming a sizable portion of the population.
The overall number of deaths in the nation might be decreased by enforcing stricter laws on public gun ownership. According to Kruis et al. (2023), Democratic leaders and President Biden have pushed for the adoption of “common sense” gun control measures such as banning assault weapons, requiring background checks for all gun sales, and providing more funding for the enforcement of existing gun laws. They contend that these changes will contribute to lowering America’s excessively high gun crime rates. Therefore, unless stringent safeguards are implemented, the younger generation will be exposed to negative messages and emulate aggressive actions to defend themselves.
Gun Control Restriction Empowers Criminals
More gun control limitations will encourage criminals to prevail over victims by giving them the upper hand. Although assault weapon prohibitions and broad criminal background checks are supported by a large portion of the population, both ideas have continuously failed to become law. The National Rifle Association (NRA) holds the view that “the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun” (Schildkraut & Carr, 2020, p.1052).
To avoid mass shootings, additional gun control laws should be implemented (Kaufman et al., 2018). From the viewpoint of outlaws and criminals, this is just another false assumption. Criminals possessing these illegal guns now have an enormously easier time conducting their crimes since they are not worried about retaliation from those who could be armed. They do this since they understand that the more restrictions on firearms are put in place, the more likely it is that community members are unlikely to defend themselves in an attack. The public will not be able to defend itself from those looking to cause broad harm to it.
It is remarkable to see individuals taking a stance and trying to address a genuine, dreadful, and serious issue in response to gun control advocates. Unfortunately, restricting access to firearms will not effectively safeguard lives. Many better and more practical alternatives will yield noticeably better outcomes for everyone in America.
It is irrational for gun control proponents to insist on making it illegal to own weapons, which many people believe is necessary for their security. In addition, the vast majority of arguments presented by gun control proponents are erroneous. For example, the argument that “Gun regulation saves lives” is used by proponents of gun control (Spitzer, 2019). It is disturbing that the primary justification offered by gun control proponents is untrue when an examination is done to prevent gun deaths and save lives. As a result, stricter gun laws will increase the number of fatalities.
Furthermore, another frequently cited justification for gun restriction is that individuals are denied the right to own whatever weapon they want. Likewise, this argument is false since the US Constitution guarantees everyone the right to possess whatever weapon is necessary to defend oneself from a tyrannical government (US Constitution – Second Amendment, 2022). For instance, the legislation emphasizes that to purchase a firearm legally, a person must submit to extensive background checks and wait a predetermined amount of time. People can therefore access whatever firearm they like, provided they complete the correct steps to acquire such arsenals and are of legal age.
It is clear from the evidence above that gun restrictions have harmed more people than it has helped. As a result, there is a potential solution to the issue, and gun control must be seen in the context of that underlying concern. There is a need to look at possibilities contributing to this problem since dictators have had trouble enforcing strict limitations on selling weapons to criminals. Notably, the sale of illegal weapons frequently brings ongoing mass shootings. Since there is more money to be made on the black market, individuals must understand that someone will profit from selling these illegal firearms on the black market, which will eventually end up in the possession of criminals.
As a result, criminals may easily get these guns as long as they have the means to do so. The fact that criminals seek weapons is essential since they face several opponents. Additionally, criminals believe that having a firearm with them will shield them from harm and keep law enforcement from catching them while they are unprotected. Thus, striving to restrict firearms to reduce the number of shooting events in the neighborhood would not have adverse effects. Still, it would leave the community open to attack by armed criminals who now hold the bulk of illegal firearms bought on the black market.
Conclusion
Arguments made by supporters and opponents of gun control measures provide important ideas that politicians should consider. According to the discussion, swift implementation of gun control measures is necessary to assist the nation in reducing or eliminating the number of gun-related fatalities. It is feasible to impose strict regulations on gun ownership in the US to make it challenging to obtain a handgun.
For instance, areas with strict gun prohibitions saw decreased crime involving weapons. The government needs practical measures to stop mass shootings, such as capping the number of weapons the general population may own. Beyond restricting public access to firearms, Americans must adopt extra preventative actions to stop widespread gun violence.
References
‌Charles, J. D., & Garrett, B. L. (2022). The trajectory of federal gun crimes. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 170(3), 637–715.
Ingraham, C. (2018). There are more guns than people in the United States, according to a new study of global firearm ownership. The Washington Post. Web.
Kaufman, E. J., Morrison, C. N., Branas, C. C., & Wiebe, D. J. (2018). State firearm laws and interstate firearm deaths from homicide and suicide in the United States: A cross-sectional analysis of data by county. JAMA Internal Medicine, 178(5), 692-700. Web.
Kruis, N. E., Wentling, R. L., Frye, T. S., & Rowland, N. J. (2023). Firearm ownership, defensive gun usage, and support for gun control: Does knowledge matter? American Journal of Criminal Justice, 48(1), 21–50. Web.
LeSavage, A. L. (2019). American gun violence: An information asymmetry problem. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Law and Public Affairs, 4(2), 4.
Schildkraut, J., & Carr, C. M. (2020). Mass shootings, legislative responses, and public policy: An endless cycle of inaction. Emory Law Journal, 69(5), 1043–1076
Schwartz, N. S. (2022). Aiming for success: Toward an evidence-based evaluation framework for gun control policies. World Affairs, 185(3), 442–470. Web.
Spitzer R. J. (2021). The politics of gun control (8th ed.). Routledge.
US Constitution – Second Amendment (2022). Constitution Annotated Congress: Analysis and Interpretation of US Constitution. Congress.gov. Web.