Are putting stricter gun laws on fire arms an imposition of the people’s rights? Gun control has become a rising issue in the United States recently, with all the gun violence occurring. Supporters and opponents of stricter gun laws both make very compelling arguments concerning this topic. The public is capable of ending this debate of gun control, so that citizens will be able to use their guns for the purpose they were created for. Many people who purchase fire arms are law-abiding citizens who use these weapons for protection or sport. Recent events would say that the government needs to have these stricter gun laws in order to protect the public. However, critics believe this would only put the public in more danger. Putting stricter laws on guns would only prevent innocent civilians from obtaining fire arms, not the criminals. For instance, America has outlawed the use of drugs, but yet drug issues are still a problem today. Criminals will still be able to access guns, and banning them would only prevent people from protecting themselves from these criminals. "The right to own and carry weapons is granted by the Constitution and upheld by the Supreme Court, and that right has been modified …show more content…
In fact, about fifty percent of all homes in the United States contain at least one firearm. More than half of these are loaded or have ammunition stored with the gun (Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection, 2015).
It is not realistic for the public to rely on the law enforcement for protection. According to Representative Ron Paul, when the Tucson shooting occurred, it took the police roughly twenty minutes to arrive on scene that day. He also stated that the police cannot be everywhere all the time, which is why the public must rely on self-defense. There have been records of recent shootings concerning police enforcements and