Jeff once said, “The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles.” There are many disadvantages for tougher gun control laws. Tougher laws will not reduce crime. The good men and woman will be punished.
Tougher laws will not reduce crime. This nation was built to have a right to bear arms, but this freedom is more controversial than ever. With all the school shootings and gun violence in America today, at some point it may just seem too take away all guns may be the answer to this problem. In defense, this isn’t the answer. If someone wants to commit a crime, gun laws will not stop them from obtaining the weapon. For example, drugs are illegal, but every day, you either see someone with, or recovering from a drug habit. People are responsible for the crimes they do, not the guns themselves. Gun control aims to restrict firearms by selecting who can sell, buy and possess a gun. Criminals won’t obey the laws and the stricter gun control law or banning the guns. However.
…show more content…
One main reason is so the people can protect themselves, or their family. Taking guns from the U.S citizens that use them for shooting practice, hunting and self-defense, should not be punished for the acts of criminals. “Guns in the right hands help public safety. Guns in the wrong hands harm public safety” as stated by Mytheos Holt. Not only it’s wrong to ban guns, but it’s also against the second amendment, which states, “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the secretary, of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” On the other