Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Summary of gun control debate
Essays on the effect of gun violence
The effect of gun control
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Summary of gun control debate
Essays on the effect of gun violence
The effect of gun control
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Summary of gun control debate
Passing gun control legislation that creates a universal background check and gun database system as well as passing mental health legislation that improves the health care system’s protocols and policies for assisting people with mental health disorders and that enacts counseling programs in communities and schools will decrease the likelihood of mass shootings in schools. The United States is bitterly divided. Issues of great concern, such as the rise of mass shootings, are partisanized. Both sides of the debate will not comprise or listen to what their opponents have to say. Groups from both sides can only agree that one innocent life taken from gun violence is one too many.
stricter gun laws are not needed in the united states. One argument is , if guns were outlawed criminals would still find ways to arm themselves. Gun control laws won’t stop mass shootings. Most shootings are from criminals that want to kill people like gangs kill people because they don't give them the drugs.
The con side of gun control laws made good points as to why more laws would not be in the benefit of the people but they did not provide credible sources to increase the credibility of their claims. A lot of their references included well known newspapers such as the Chicago Tribune and the NY Times. While they did reference the Supreme Court, US Fish and Wildlife Services, and the Heritage Foundation I believe that these few sources are not enough to support their claims and make them credible. When looking at their Top Con quotes I found that they used a lot more credible sources such as US representatives, senators, and the Founder and President of Crime Prevention Research Center. Therefore they were able to make their claims more credible.
In 1987, the bill that would soon become a law and make buying guns safer was introduced in congress. This bill was named after James Brady hints the name, “Brady Bill.” James Brady was the White House Press Secretary at the time. He was permanently disabled after receiving a gunshot wound to his forehead in 1981, in the attempted Ronald Reagan assassination. This bill required licensed firearms importers, manufactures, or dealers to wait five days before selling a handgun to another person not licensed under federal law.
The law is never something to take lightly especially when the specific law is set in place to prevent the loss of human life. Gun control laws have a basis set by the federal government and are expanded upon by each individual state as they deem fit. Federal gun laws and state gun laws have their similarities and differences, but both are set in place as a barrier of protection against those who could cause bodily harm to others if equipped with such power that a gun holds. The U.S federal Government has its own set of regulations concerning firearms and the state of California builds upon them to create a stronger gun policy, meaning both sets of codes and regulations have similarities and differences, but no matter the differences, these laws are set in place to prevent massacres like the Las Vegas, Nevada shooting, and while California gun laws are built upon federal laws, they can be improved for a safer more controlled environment. Federal gun laws are the foundation for state laws and the building blocks for more advanced restrictions set by individual
On September 25 of 1789 our founding fathers constructed the Constitution of the United States, Which included the second Amendment where it allowed civilians the right as American to bear arms. On October 22,1968 president Lyndon B. Johnson signed a The Gun Control law of 1968. The Gun control act of 1968 was part of a “great society” movement by president Johnson that was initiated after the assassination of president Kennedy (Eakins). In the 1994 ban signing by president Clinton and the federal government, which imposed 19 types of military-style weapons to be banned for ten- years. This legislation was intended to reduce the gun violence and decreased national tragedies.
With so many shootings arising these days, many people wonder whether handguns should be banned or not. Some people say it is a part of American history and that they would not be here today without guns. While others believe that the country would be more peaceful and safe if the guns were illegal. The problems that come with banning guns are endless and could possibly cause many more problems than necessary or intended. Having a handgun is a way of protection and self defense.
1st Amendment: The First Amendment of the United States Constitution states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridg-ing the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” In short, this amendment prohibits the establishment of a state religion, protects freedom of the press and speech, and protects the right to assemble and petition the government. The establishment clause enforces the separation of church and state and prohibits the government from restricting a citizen’s religious practices and forbids the government from forcing religion onto its citizens.
Gun control laws have become too much. There are too many gun control laws in the United States. Laws are not going to scare criminals who have a past record or are set on hurting people. Firearms can protect people that have valuable items on them or in their house. There is becoming less criminal with the more purchases or weapons.
Throughout history, especially recently, the question of whether gun control violates the 2nd Amendment has been a question which many people claim they know the answer to, but it may not be that transparent. I believe gun control is constitutional, and it deters crime and makes society safer, meaning I side with the pro-gun control ideas. Within the topic of gun control, there are many factors in which people must take into consideration when proposing an answer such as whether it deters crime, what the economic impact is, and what should be changed. NEW PARAGRAPH... Gun control can date way back, but what really made it controversial was the court case of Heller vs DC in 2008.
Should there be gun control laws? Everyone has their own opinions on whether we should have gun control laws or not. Everyone tries to interpret the meaning of the Second Amendment, but no interpretation is needed. The Second Amendment means exactly what it says. Constitutionally, gun control should not be allowed.
Gun laws are one of the reason that rates the percentage of criminals over the US population. The Gun Control Act of 1968 was accepted by signature of President Lydon B.Johnson on October 22,1968 that gave the gun licensed for the firearm dealers, and prohibited them to sell a gun for felons, drug users, or mentally incompetent persons. This Act was passed under presidential term of John F Kennedy in 1963 that prelude an assassination by firearm. Obviously, gun control laws apply for all citizens who include offenders. Because on one side the government think owning a handgun that eliminates gun deaths.
Criminals who ignore laws in the first place, will not follow laws restricting them having guns. Thomas Sowell stated, “The key fallacy of so-called gun control laws is that such laws do not in fact control guns. They simply disarm law-abiding citizens, while people bent on violence find firearms readily available.” Even with gun laws people would still find ways to get guns, but they would start to get them illegally through the black market. John Stossel, Author of “gun control isn't crime control” says “It seems counterintuitive but makes sense if we consider one simple fact: Criminals don't obey the law.
In conclusion, gun control is a broken social contract in America that needs to be changed. In order to change this social contract, more restrictions on guns should be made. People who intend to own a gun should take gun safety classes and go through certain procedures such as mental health tests and background checks in every state. All fifty states in America should abide by the same gun restriction laws. What is significant about gun control is that the right to bear arms varies from state to state, affects American citizens and police, and is a threat to American society.
Most guns are stolen and used for crime so don't let just anyone own a gun. So the overall crime rate will lower due to the fact it's harder for people to get there hands on a gun which is beneficial to everyone. (Should More Gun Control Laws Be