People have been using guns for years in the U.S. and It’s not a new concept to try to control these 300 million guns. Along with guns we also have a problem of mass shootings and killings plaguing the citizens in fear which only worsens the problem. I propose that guns don’t kill people as they can’t just get up and walk around and kill people. Guns don’t kill people, People kill people. Improved gun control is a must for recent events that have transpired in our nation. Gun Control is not the answer and will not solve the problem of people being killed by guns and or accidents by guns. My first claim is that gun control is a huge waste of time and resources with many cities, making gun violence in those cities even worse as before only dragging …show more content…
Along with the extended penalty there needs to be thorough and more long background checks on all guns big and small alike. These sanctions when applied can apply to bank robbers and hitman who engage in such illegal acts but really do not resonate with insane people who just decide to commit mass murder one day. The only way to stop this is to have less gun control so that more citizens can carry pistols so that when these events do break out, At least someone will be able to stop them from happening. Richard Epstein states”To take the extreme case, suppose that a gun control law can eliminate 99.9 percent of the guns now in circulation and that all of the remaining 200,000 guns are in the hands of hardened criminals. We can confidently predict that crime will go up unless and until there is a vast expansion of the public police force.”(4). The consequence of strict gun control is that if you confiscated all guns in circulation as stated you can almost guarantee crime to go up. To fix this problem you would have to have a huge police task force to handle illegal guns and gun violence in Chicago which currently is too deep in itself to save with pure gun control. The author makes it very clear that logically the strict policies that liberals