NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
... c health hazard. The presence of a gun, specifically a handgun, is beneficial to a civilian in the event of a robbery or intrusion, because the victim would be able to use the gun for defense. The gun control activists are right- there is too much crime in the United States. Instead of attempting to reduce the amount of firearms in circulation, this energy and money should be diverted into anti-crime applications. Many law-abiding citizens own handguns and other firearms that they use for their own protection, probably because the amount of crime present troubles them and drives them to purchase a gun for self-defense.
As David E. Newton shows, between the years of 1937 and 1963, gun ownership in the United States increased by 250 percent. In that same period, the number of homicides decreased by 35. 7 percent (Newton 40). Guns are clearly not the problem. I feel that the liberal media affects the way the public perceives guns and gun control.
People think that guns kill and maim innocents, but affect no good for their owners. The liberal media seems to magnify every time a gun is used to harm an innocent person. My question is why dont we hear about when a woman uses her gun to shoot and kill an intruder whom would have raped and killed her? Or the man that defends his family by shooting the person that breaks into his home? Why wont the media report these occurrences? The problem with most gun control measures is that gun violence depends not so much on the number of guns as to who owns them.
As an anti gun control slogan states, if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns (Bernard's 54). This is true, stating that if the circulation of firearms was limited to only officials, meaning that private citizens would not have guns, then only criminals would have firearms (illegally of course) and the public could not defend themselves. Most of the criminals who commit violent crimes with guns did not obtain their guns legally. Toughening up gun control laws is not going to reduce crime. Another liberal argument against guns is using their children as the reason for gun control. The liberals will say, Do you want your child to be killed with a gun?
That question is absurd. That is like asking if you want you child hit by a bus. Without guns however, how will we be able to protect our families from the criminals that will illegally possess guns? Gun control activists say that waiting periods will reduce the number of criminals who obtain firearms, but the NRA says that waiting periods are ineffective.
They argue that if a criminals mind were set on committing a crime, a waiting period would merely become another obstacle. Even if a background check were to take place during the waiting period, and the criminal was denied the sale of a gun, a weapon could easily be obtained elsewhere: stolen, bought illegally, or another weapon could be used. The point is that a criminal with the premeditation to act out a crime is going to do so, whether a waiting period is present or not. Guns stored at home are not great dangers to innocent people like children, despite what the public thinks. The slogan of the National Rifle Association says it the best, guns dont kill, people do (NRA). Children who are properly taught gun-safety measures are less likely to be involved in gun-related accidents or with crime.
If an adult in the household has access to a firearm, such a childs life could actually be saved if an intrusion were to take place. As David B. Kopel states, Gun control Advocates are hammering at the issue of children and guns as never before in the hope that it will be easier to enact gun controls aimed at adults in an atmosphere of panic about children (Kopel 38). Mr. Kopel is Director of the Second Amendment Project at the Independence Institute. Children are not in any danger that cannot be prevented with the correct educative measures.
The ban on Assault weapons will not help reduce gun violence. Despite the scary-looking, military-style features, the assault weapons are no more lethal than hundreds of legal firearms. First of all, the definition of an assault weapon is not distinct and under the national ban no one knows what an assault weapon is and what a regular firearm is. (NRA) Giving the name assault weapon is similar to giving red vehicles with speedometers that go beyond one hundred miles per hour the name death cars because these are said to be the favored vehicles of drunk and reckless drivers. Assault weapons are or were surprisingly attributed to less than one quarter of one percent of violent crimes in New Jersey.
A police officer has a better chance of encountering a wild bear from the local zoo than confronting an assault weapon. But the liberal media makes this a priority, ignoring the facts. Gun control should not take place. The constitution prohibits it, common sense when it comes to protection invalidates it, many statistics prove it, and any reasonable person when confronted with the facts will disagree with it. Guns are not health hazards, a danger to children, nor preventable with hassling bills and restrictions.
The many differences in types of guns do not give reason to ban these guns called Assault Weapons. The second amendment should end the argument to the whole gun control debate, and maybe in a few years another analysis of it will. Or maybe gun control activists, instead of trying to prevent the ownership of guns, which deter crime, should focus their energy and effort towards the root of the crime problem- the criminals. Works Cited American Medical Association Medical Glossary web hlth / glossary /glos p. htm Bernard's, Neal. Gun Control.
San Diego: Lucent Books, Inc, 1991. Findlaw. com U. S. Constitution: Second Amendment web Kopel, David B. Gun Play.
Reason Magazine. Los Angeles: Reason Inc, 1993. McCain, John McCain 2000 web Newton, David E. Gun Control: An Issue for the Nineties.
Hillside: Enslow Publishers, 1992. National Rifle Association Press Releases and Policy Reports web Roleff, Tamara L. Gun Control, Opposing Viewpoints. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1997.
Whitley, John John Whitley's Gun Control Quotes Page. web Viewed 15 Feb. 2000. Bibliography: Works Cited American Medical Association Medical Glossary web hlth / glossary /glos p. htm Bernard's, Neal. Gun Control.
San Diego: Lucent Books, Inc, 1991. Findlaw. com U. S.
Constitution: Second Amendment web Kopel, David B. Gun Play. Reason Magazine. Los Angeles: Reason Inc, 1993. McCain, John McCain 2000 web Newton, David E. Gun Control: An Issue for the Nineties.
Hillside: Enslow Publishers, 1992. National Rifle Association Press Releases and Policy Reports web Roleff, Tamara L. Gun Control, Opposing Viewpoints. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1997. Whitley, John John Whitley's Gun Control Quotes Page. web Viewed 15 Feb. 2000.
Free research essays on topics related to: opposing viewpoints, assault weapon, violent crimes, enslow publishers, gun control activists
Research essay sample on Gun Control Activists Opposing Viewpoints
