ipl-logo

The Pros And Cons Of Gun Control Laws

1247 Words5 Pages

The Brady Act would be strength based if there were not loopholes in the law for getting guns such as not requiring background checks for private sellers, online gun dealers, and trade shows. However, new laws that close the loopholes and tighter gun control laws that include several laws are strength based because they do lower the death rates and violence caused from firearms. Research studies show a correlation between states that do have strict gun laws compared to others that are lax. One study done by the “researchers at Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, and Harvard School of Public Health, uses a measure of state-by-state legislative strength of gun control policies tracked by the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, …show more content…

His order doesn't rewrite existing laws, but it would broaden the scope of who is in the gun-selling business. It would require more gun sellers online and at gun shows to be licensed (and perform checks) among other things” (Kurtzleben, 2016). Background checks combined with many other laws for gun control can work together by making it tougher for someone to get a gun that should not have one it is not about taking rights away to others only for offenders and others who could cause harm to others or themselves. “Gun-policy researchers say they want to better study background checks as well as many other policies, but a couple of hurdles stand in the way. Part of the problem is that good studies on the effectiveness of background checks are pretty rare, according to Webster. One reason is that it's hard to find good test cases to study. There’s not a lot of change or variation in laws to study in recent times, he said. The vast majority of these laws have been on the books for many, many decades” (Kurtzleben, 2016). We can say that background checks can make a difference along with other tighter gun control laws from some studies that have been done. However, for us to have a clearer picture on what works and what does not we need to fund research for gun control issues which is lacking? “Federal restrictions, passed in 1996 that said the Centers for Disease Control could not use its funding to "advocate or promote gun control." That caused the CDC to back away from gun research almost entirely. Outside organizations could pick up that slack, Hemenway added, but they have not done so. "The foundations haven't done a good job, because it's such a controversial area," he said. You don't want to get involved. So we know some things, but we don't know as well as you would hope, given the enormity of the problem” (Kurtzleben, 2016). In final analysis, passing background checks for everyone is a

Show More
Related
1553 Words | 7 Pages

Since this system has been in effect, more then 2.4 million potential buyers have been denied. That is a huge number that may have saved countless lives and is definitely the type of procedures we need in this country to help gun violence decrease. The problem that arises is that the country needs to stop dividing on the debate of banning weapons and start taking the right steps to make sure that guns don’t end up in the hands of the wrong people. Only around sixty percent of gun sales use background checks.

Read More
808 Words | 4 Pages

It says in the constitution itself. If someone wishes to get a gun, they can get a gun. Prohibiting them or placing stricter laws will be of no benefit. While conducting background checks on individuals who wish to purchase a gun does have some rationale to it, it could make any law abiding American look like an unstable psycho for committing a simple act with no mal intent. For example, say a friend

Read More
457 Words | 2 Pages

Furthermore, "When researchers studied Missouri's 2007 repeal of its permit to purchase law, they found an associated increase in gun homicides by 23 percent, as well as a 16- percent increase in suicides". Missouri had a law where they had to check your history but then they removed it and gun homicides and suicides increased. Both gun homicides and suicides increased significantly. Background checks are a waste of time and pointless if you are a good person. The bad people can still get their guns threw a person who is good and has a good history.

Read More
822 Words | 4 Pages

Guns control is not strict enough these days. The U.S government does not put down laws strict enough to deal with people purchasing guns without having a license. Some people who are aggressive and have health issues should not be allowed to have guns because they might go out and shoot people in anger. " No legitimate study in the U.S has ever shown that gun control has any positive Impact on crime"?

Read More
847 Words | 4 Pages

If this doesn’t scream gun laws don’t work, I honestly don’t know what does. If we were to further examine these “experts,” or just the past in general, there will be a common trend of gun control

Read More
461 Words | 2 Pages

Amongst all the debate there are multiple reasons as to why people believe there’s no sense in adding more gun control laws. There are already laws that help prevent just anyone from getting a gun. Nathaniel

Read More
887 Words | 4 Pages

In the statistic to the right there a four noticeably large spikes in the years of 1975, 1980, 1993, and 1994 (Alexia pg 2). In all four years gun laws appear in relation. In 1993 Congress passed the The Brady Handgun Violence Act. The main action that the Brady handgun act did, it put a five day waiting period on selling firearms(Bureau).

Read More
1354 Words | 6 Pages

(Richards, Paragraph 4) With the system being like this it leaves for a lot of loopholes for the criminals and their helpers to get through to purchase a gun. Stricter background checks in gun shows and online websites would make for a safer gun buying experience because a person will know who is getting the gun that is being sold. The people that do not want this, say it is harder for them and takes more time to go through the process of getting a gun, but if they know they have a clean record then what do they have to lose? A stricter background check should not affect anybody but the bad people and criminals that do not have any business with guns anyway. In a separate study, “Webster found that firearm-related homicides in Connecticut dropped 40 percent after the state adopted a 1995 law that required anyone seeking to buy a handgun to apply for a permit with the local police, complete at least eight hours of safety training, and be 21 years old.”

Read More
1129 Words | 5 Pages

Supporters of strengthening gun laws say that strengthening them could save lives because it is taking away the tools the shooters are using to kill other Americans. According to a Harvard gun violence researcher David Hemenway: "There is a consensus that strong gun laws reduce homicide" (Doherty). This piece of evidence shows that strengthening gun laws could potentially significantly reduce gun violence. Another argument is that stronger gun laws make it harder for criminals to get guns. In the article "Gun Control Reform," it talks about criminals finding loopholes in the system when it comes to the mental emotional portion, they check out as good on parts of the background check, even if some of them have a history of mental illness, so they are obtaining guns and using them for harm because of these loopholes ("Gun Control Reform").

Read More
1856 Words | 8 Pages

Therefore, there need to be more laws and limitations when it comes to selling a gun either through a private or public seller. Max Ehrenfreund also says that “Requiring background checks for private sales and transfers would make it harder for convicted felons to buy guns secondhand, but some would still buy guns as a favor to brothers or boyfriends who wouldn 't qualify themselves (Ehrenfreund). Whether someone is selling a gun from a private or public party there needs to be background checks. Background checks need to be more invasive to ensure public safety. Former President Barack Obama once said that “I am taking within my legal authority to protect the American people and keep guns out of the hands of criminals and dangerous people.

Read More
715 Words | 3 Pages

Having background checks are good to prevent violent offenders from buying weapons but there again it does not prevent them from getting weapons. It may slow down the process but it does not eliminate the process. With the long wait times for citizens to receive their guns the criminals are receiving their weapons quicker and have an advantage over the law abiding citizens. Gun control laws actually help criminals.

Read More
995 Words | 4 Pages

‘In the late 1980s, gun control groups realized that they had failed in their original goal—getting handguns banned—and began campaigning against semi-automatic firearms they called "assault weapons," most of which are rifles’(“A ban on assault weapons would not reduce crime”). From 1994 to 2004, the Federal Assault Weapons (F.D.A) banned semi automatic weapons from having more than 10 rounds. The easiest way to define gun control is by saying it a government regulation sale of any type of handgun, or assault rifle. It’s just a certain style the government sales firearms, if you have a criminal background or criminal history you are not allowed to purchase a firearm due to gun control. I personally think gun control doesn’t cause any harm to today’s society, considering the fact that i’m constantly around guns and I have no violent urge to put anyone in danger.

Read More
678 Words | 3 Pages

This shows that strict gun control laws don’t significantly decrease the amount of gun violence. Instead, it encourages more people to commit acts of crime such as robbery and murder without being

Read More
760 Words | 4 Pages

Justin King, a reporter, says, “There is a spike in murders immediately after a ban, but it is short lived” (par. 2), and he gives statistics of 3 countries, more specifically the United Kingdom, Ireland, and Australia, that had authorized an embargo on guns that show an increase but then dropped back down to a normal rate. People tell us everyday that the purpose of a gun control law is to completely halt gun owners from shooting and killing others (King par. 3). This shows that King probably thought that a gun control law didn’t make much of an effect for those three countries. Because of that, maybe he didn’t think that laws like that would do much for a country’s safety. For background checks, they are sort of similar to the start of gun control.

Read More
942 Words | 4 Pages

The authors provide two possible reasons why these laws are ineffective; 1) these laws do not effect criminal behavior and their efforts to obtain weapons illegally, and 2) these laws focus on normal gun purchases and don 't account for private sales and guns passed down through families. This article is a very creditable source; one reason is because it looks directly at statistics instead of being based solely on opinion. Secondly, this article is also peer reviewed article; this means that other individuals have critiqued these authors research and found it to be accurate. This source will be very useful to my paper because it takes statistical approach approach the the situation instead of a opinionated one.

Read More

More about The Pros And Cons Of Gun Control Laws

Related Topics

Open Document