Reducing Gun Related Mass Killings - Law Essay Sample

Nearly more than 200 million guns are used by private hands as part of recreation, hunting, and target shooting. But what brings out a controversial argument is when these firearms are used against other people during their commission or self-defense against a crime. Guns are regarded as an important crime deterrent and a source of protection. But could you imagine what damage the guns do while in the hands of criminals? Household firearm ownership is actually a probability of good measure in accessibility of guns used in the suicide since most of the suicide at home involves us of a gun at home. (Bloomberg 2013 ) household ownership of firearms seems also to be the reason we have a number of homicides that take place at home, where women, children, and older adults are likely to be murdered. There has been a series of mass killing by civilians in civilian settings as can be seen particularly in 2012 when a gunman killed 20 school children. Another thread of lethal mass killing happened in 2015, which saw the murder of nine worshippers at a church in Charleston, South Carolina, and 14 more were killed in San Bernadino.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

There are various measures that can be taken to reduce the number of killings that has occurred in the given time which can be highly effective in reducing gun related mass killings.

Projecting the outcome for alternative #1: regarding the status quo on gun control

Reduction of gun ownership

The current laws on gun control require a criminal background check for all guns sales. If the requirement is observed to the latter a number of anticipated criminal suspects will be disarmed or banned from accessing guns legally. A number of people with any criminal record will not be in a suitable position to acquire guns. Approximately 200 guns are used per day for criminal activities it, therefore, goes by stating if the guns were to be sold any criminal activities associated with them would be detected.

The laws requiring dealers selling guns at gun shows and online to obtain federal licenses, and the requirement to conduct a background check for prospective buyers are important in preventing and closing any loopholes that might allow violent criminals and others to acquire weapons without FBI screening. The possibility of reduced sales on guns will be up to about 45%, since only legalized markets will be in a passion for doing this.

Reduction in gun -related crimes

The laws also have restrictions on the sale of the attack weapons, and limits to 10- round on every ammunition, elimination of armor penetrating bullets and provision of psychological health services in schools and there has been set a federal gun trafficking statute. The registration of firearms is formidable in helping identify the owner of a gun when it has been used in crimes. This will help prevent the sale of guns illegally since the owner of the gun has to get worried how his/her gun will be used if they sell it illegally. The background checks which are run on FBI databases include persons subject to domestic violence, it contains a criminal history of an individual, retraining orders, and arrest warrants for criminals. (FBI (2012). A study envisages that 68.8% of inmates who once used guns in crimes, acquired their guns through dealings that did not have a background check. (Washington bureau of justice statistics 2011) The limitation on the number of rounds will also reduce, mass killings that occur unexpectedly.

Improved responsibility

Firearm registration has the benefit of helping trace a gun to its owner and helps create a sequence of responsibility that creates an inducement for each gun holder to help enforce the law. This is majorly important since a number of gun transfer occurs in the secondary market. I think the current restriction will work well and reduce the number of unwanted crimes happening by ensuring that everyone involved in firearms is a licensed dealer. Citizens will be more cautious in lending out or selling off their guns if gun related to a crime can be traced back to them, Imposing criminal liability to each gun owner for any crimes committed with their guns will mark as an eye opener where individuals will use their guns in a more accountable way.

There still might be loopholes in background check since such acts may not prevent a person from committing suicide or homicide. Another hurdle is that there is no research done to show how effective the outcome will be after a given period. The recent shootings tell us that there more loopholes which ought to be addressed.

Alternative 2: Adopting the Australian- style intervention way

Increase in public sense of security

The Australian laws prohibit the use of automatic and semi-automatic assault refiles, and there are stiffened license and ownership rules. The legislations actually require a licensee to reveal a sincere need for a specific type of gun before buying it, and he/she is required to have a firearm safety course study. With such kind of regulation, it is foreseeable that citizens will not have to worry about who carries guns that are likely to cause harm to the public. Students will feel safe going to their particular schools and worshippers will not have to worry about the likelihood of being attacked by another citizen who might legally own assault refiles. The number of citizens who feel secure when the states intervene on gun ownership is likely to rise up to 80%. If everyone carried an assault weapon, there may be a sense of panic since you dont know when another person is likely to strike. What happens also to children who depend on the state and the government to protect them do they also need guns for self-defense?

Accountability among gun owners

The police are also allowed to go visit a particular house randomly and conduct an inspection with regards to firearms. Transporting a rifle requires that it should have a trigger lock. The need for one to prove why they really need a gun obviously has to be accessed and the rightful ownership of guns will not be a problem if only the sale is done strictly. Prohibiting ownership of guns to persons having restraining orders will help give the notion that law -abiding citizens are given authority to own guns.

Reduced gun crimes

Analysis done designates that measures taken have been operative, mentioning a decrease in gun-death percentage, and the fact that there have been no more gun mass homicide cases in Australia since 1996. (Wang-sheng, 2008) adopting the Australian way according to my judgment seems to be effective since there havent been any mass killings since the laws were implemented. Implementation of the law will probably see a reduced number of gun related crimes by 88%.although this cannot just be achieved by placing on legislation without foreseeing the implementation of those laws.There is a need to ensure that the state gives out a safety test to gun potential buyers.

Reduced number of guns

If the state decides to buy back guns from citizens and keep them for safety use, there can be a reduction in the number of firearms in the private hands which might probably be used to cause harm to others. State buying guns will see an attainment and termination of more than 600,000 guns and refiles. The score will be more effective if the state puts it as a mandatory requirement to purchase the wrongly acquired gun from the citizens, otherwise, the state putting on an initiative to buy guns does no guarantee that criminals will opt to sell it to them. The reason behind this is that they might get more while using the guns. It, therefore, calls for a compulsory initiative to conduct a search and acquisition of the unwanted guns.

Unfortunately, many gun users argue that the states action will lead to a number of citizens right infringed. If the guns are to be used for self-defense, the state is likely to be put in a civil suit in cases where a gun owner was attacked and had a chance of defending themselves but did not since their guns were acquired.

Alternative 3: Adopting a nationwide permit to purchase policy

Legalized trading of guns

Giving restrictions for an individual to have a permit in purchasing guns may give a surprisingly formidable obstacle between dangerous people and the guns. In the comparison of a car which requires one to have a permit to acquire one, and details on the purchase of the item. You cannot actually buy a car if you do not have the driving license to prove that you are a designated driver and understand that the license should be carried with you everywhere you use the car. Having prospective gun buyers to make application for the license at a given available office, have fingerprints measurements taken, and produce their own photograph together with their identification details will see the purchase and use of guns happening in a legal manner. The permits should also have an expiry or give a period within which purchasers can go renew their permit and have their data run for any details to be filled such as any current mental health condition which might jeopardize the whole process of registration. The process will see only abiding law citizens can purchase guns. Law abiding citizens will definitely not endanger the society and they will be in a position to enjoy their gun ownership rights without jeopardizing the life of others.

Increased sense of security

As mentioned earlier citizens will feel more secure gun owners undergo a strict process of acquiring those guns. Requiring one to purchase a license means that there is need to worry less in terms of security. A person has to qualify and meet the terms and conditions of having a gun.

However this does not prohibit the open carrying of firearms by the licensed individuals, it holds as a danger that even licensed people are likely to commit crimes such as homicide or even suicide. There is a thin line between predicting when a person has ill motives or good motives while purchasing a gun which leads us the point the traceability of the guns used in crimes is only meant to scare people away from committing those crimes and does not guarantee that a crime will not occur. But the benefits are more encouraging having an assurance that at least the gun owners will be held liable in case they intend to commit crimes.

sReferences

Michael R ,Bloomberg (2013) Gun Violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis.

Federal bureau of investigation. National instance criminal background check system (NICS) operations .washington,DC ,2012

Center for America progress analysis of Caroline wolf Harlow,firearm use by offenders (Washington bureau of justice statistics, 2011) .

Wang- sheng Lee and Sandi Suardi. (2008). The Australian Fire arms Buyback and its effect on Gun deaths