Introduction
An increase in gun violence has characterized the past few years. Most of the debate has emphasized ensuring that deadly weapons are kept away from killers’ hands or on gun regulation. Unfortunately, there has been little attention paid to the impact on the victims of gun violence. Worthwhile results can be realized through moderate measures; the best place to start is with evidence that illustrates the effectiveness of gun policy. The current gun policies have an impact in the US, and three-point solutions are crucial to find mass shooting evidence, depending on reinforcing gun possession laws, an armed society’s politeness, and gun illegalization.
Impact of Gun Policy in the US
The impact of gun policy in the US is evident in people injured or killed in atrocities such as the Aurora Theater and Sandy Hook shootings, which are mourned and remembered publicly. Statistics indicate that over 15% of children are witnessing violent acts in their schools, communities, and homes, and over 5% are witnessing a shooting (Boine et al. 3). Skeptics can easily criticize any moderate program meant to reduce gun violence.
In the US alone, more than 200 million guns are circulating, which is among the highest rates globally (Boine et al. 4). However, Boine et al.’s research indicates a more positive conclusion. It is not a must that legitimate private gun ownership be done away with as a measure to reduce criminals’ and youths’ misuse of guns.
Reinforcing Gun Possession Laws
Guns have the effect of intensifying violence, particularly when guns are in the hands of reckless or violent persons, people who cannot be trusted. The fact that guns are inherently dangerous and could be misused increases the risk of gun violence, especially in the US, where guns are easily accessible (Wallace 35). Predominantly, most killers have a record of arrest; thus, the possession of guns by individuals who are criminally involved or inclined to violence poses a higher cost for society than when in the control of responsible people(Greg 32). This exemplifies the need to edit the slogan so that it is not guns that kill people; instead, it is impulsive and violent people with guns that do.
The design of gun policy should thus start with the identification of violence-prone individuals. Already, there is a prohibition on anyone under indictment or convicted of a felony from gun possession (Buggs 3). This applies to persons under a restraining order and those with domestic violence convictions. These laws should be reinforced with policies requiring licensed gun dealers to check the criminal history of individuals purchasing weapons before firearm transfer (Buggs 4). Recently, there has been an improvement in criminal records; thus, policy enforcement identification of potentially dangerous individuals will help tackle the gun violence problem.
An Armed Society Is a Polite One
Enacting the appropriate policy should start with posing the questions to determine how widespread gun ownership deters crime. The argument that the private possession of guns benefits society is based on the claim that it deters crime. For example, as avowed by John R. Lott, an economist and author of the book More Guns, Less Crime. However, this position is not supported by empirical evidence. Little association exists between gun ownership prevalence and the volume of fierce crime (Wallace52). As far as residential burglary is concerned, the evidence shows that an increase in the prevalence of gun rates also increases burglary rates, maybe because guns are of value to criminals.
Existing research can help identify the appropriate policy in this case. Of particular attention has been the assessment of concealed-carry laws. Figures have been published suggesting that states that have alleviated concealed-carrying restrictions have had reduced rates of homicide and other crimes (Wallace54).
However, subsequent research has refuted this finding, and it is more apparent that easing concealed-carry laws has little effect on the crime rate. The presence of such divergent opinions is very beneficial for policymakers. Even if extensive gun ownership in a community has a slight effect on crime deterrence, there is still some benefit related to crime (Boine et al. 9).
Owners of guns can sporadically halt an assaulter from instigating an injury or interrupting a burglary. However, having a reliable approximation of its practical prevalence has proven problematic. Still, a known fact is that the US is one of the leading countries as far as gun accessibility is concerned worldwide. Consequently, such prevalence should also be expected to be high.
Surveys have offered a vast range of estimates, depending on the question’s particular wording and how it was posed to respondents. The National Crime Victimization Survey estimate insinuates that there exist approximately 100,000 instances annually where a person utilizes a gun to offer a defense against a break-in or assault (Greg 36). Irrespective of the objective benefits and risks that gun ownership presents, it often conveys a sense of safety to household members who have guns. Policymakers should assess this benefit; an important point is to incorporate a policy requiring household members to recommend those who are safe to own guns.
Outlawing Guns Will Result in Only Outlaws Having Guns
Understanding that restricting and regulating guns in public to limit mass shootings only affects law-abiding citizens is critical. The law prohibiting it does not apply to gangs and criminals. Instead, even with a law that bans gun regulation, criminals will always find a way to access firearms and utilize them to satisfy their sinister motives (Greg 46). The regulations and laws in place for gun laws cannot curtail or control illegal gun sales to criminals.
For instance, Chicago does not permit the sale of handguns. Shotguns, Rifles, ammunition, and shotguns in Chicago can only be purchased by persons having an owner’s identification card for a firearm (Greg 53). Consequently, Chicago is one of the states where it is tenuous to acquire guns. This is key to the mass shooting, violence, and crime witnessed in the area as opposed to areas with less strict measures.
Policymakers should focus on the gun acquisition process by enacting policies that are centered on a robust background test before one is cleared to own a gun. After a successful process, persons should be given a waiting period, such as a month, before being permitted to carry a firearm legitimately(Buggs 6). It is ironic that in the state of Chicago, where laws are most stringent on the lawful acquisition of guns, it is still where illegal gun acquisition is the simplest. A policy focused on the gun acquisition process can fill such loopholes.
Conclusion
In conclusion, gun violence is a predominant issue in American society more than in any other country globally. By exploring the three points examined above, research provides evidence that can lead to the formulation of effective gun control or mass shooting policies. It can thus be concluded that enacting effective policy will solve gun violence in America as an operative three-pronged solution addressing gun accessibility.
Works Cited
Boine Claire et al. “The Effectiveness of Value-Based Messages to Engage Gun Owners on Firearm Policies: A Three-Stage Nested Study.” Injury Epidemiology, vol. 9, no. 30 2022, pp. 1-12.
Greg, Berman. “At the Crossroads: Behind the Rise in Gun Violence in New York and Other American Cities“, 2022.
Buggs, Shani. “Community-Based Violence Intervention and Public Safety.” Amazonaws. 2022.
Wallace, Wendell C. Guns Gun Violence and Gun Homicides: Perspectives from the Caribbean Global South and Beyond. Palgrave Macmillan 2022.