Research Paper on Gun Control

Introduction

I am interested in this topic because of the increase in the number of mass shootings in America. The gun control is a very sensitive issue for the American people. This issue is relevant not only because of the impact of the loss of all human life but because these deaths are directly linked to a problem of a constitutional nature. The United States government has focused on securing its borders against external attacks. However, the same government seems unable to protect its people against internal threats that emanate from gun ownership. The main reason the government has not made any progress is tackling gun violence is due to the political nature of the issue. The left wing is in support of gun control while the right wing opposes the move as it goes against the second amendment.

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

Order now

Other people should be interested in this topic because gun violence is a threat to every American citizen. Gun Violence Archive indicates that there have been 53,476 gun incidents in 2018 so far that have resulted in 13,695 deaths across America(pg.1). That makes gun violence one of the leading causes of deaths in America. The risk becomes greater if one considers their friends, family and work colleagues. Sooner or later every American is likely to know someone or be related to someone who was a victim of gun violence. Such numbers make America one of the most unsafe countries in the world. Therefore, every American should be interested in the topic because of the risk that gun violence poses to them and the people they love. A person cannot be truly free unless they feel safe.

This topic is important to the world because of the likelihood of the violence spreading to other countries. The United States is a country with large rural areas. A gun is viewed as something more than necessary for defense or hunting. The armament industry also makes a lot of money from the industry. It makes a millionaire industry to dissuade the congressmen of changing the status quo through the National Association of the Rifle. The Republicans and the president of the United States, Donald Trump, have avoided referring to the issue and have always blocked any legislative initiative that puts more controls on access to guns. The sellers of guns defend that there are no dangerous guns, but there are vulnerable people and that the firearms become deadly only in the wrong hands. It is just a matter of time before the American market reaches a saturation level. The gun manufacturers and suppliers will then have to look for a market somewhere else.

Arguments

The government should come up with gun control legislation. The current consensus on the cause of gun violence is dependent on the political orientation of the person. According to the Democrats, easy access to guns is the primary cause of gun violence. The republicans lay the blame on the mental problems in America. It is difficult to ascertain the side that is correct because the scientific world has joined the bandwagon by taking sides. Each side seems to have scientific proof to back up its claims. Therefore, the best branch of government for such as action would be the legislator because it contains legislators from both parties. The level of government for such action would be the federal government because of the technicalities involved with state-level government. Setting up gun control at state levels will allow someone to buy a gun at one state, and cross the state borders to execute a crime at another state.

The first reason that the government should implement gun control is that of the culture of the American people. The current generation is growing around gun violence. If the legislature does not regulate the supply of guns in America, the children are going to grow up knowing that the only way to settle issues is with a gun. Exposing children to such kind of violence and behavior is unethical. The second amendment was implemented to increase security, but so far, America is one of the unsafe countries in the world. A recent report indicates that the United States is the 43rd most unsafe country in the world (Institute for Economics and Peace 32-40). America's poor ranking primarily due to gun violence. A person is safer in China than in the United States.

The second reason that the government should implement gun control is to reduce the chances of a gun landing in the wrong hands. The right-wing supporters argue that the problem with gun violence is people and not the guns. President Donald Trump has said that the mental health of Americans is responsible for the increased cases of mass shootings. Using the same argument, it makes sense to prevent the mentally unstable people from accessing guns. The only way to do so is by implementing gun control laws. Gun control laws will ensure that gun sellers conduct a background check on an aspiring gun owner before selling them the gun. Since gun laws vary according to states; it would at least make license mandatory for gun ownership in all states.

The third reason the government should implement gun control is that it is putting sections of the American population at a disadvantage. More black people are dying from gun-related incidents compared to white people. According to Howard, black men have experienced 27 more homicides per 100,000 people than white men(pg.8). That gravity of the situation becomes worse if one considered that the population of white men is more than ten times that of African American men. The same report says that 54% of black men know a person who has been shot compared to 43% of white men (Howard par.16). It, therefore, means that unregulated gun ownership is hurting one community more than others. Gun control can correct that situation.

The fourth reason that the government should implement gun control is that it will reduce the number of guns in America. The gun ownership started as a security measure, but the practice has changed into fanatism for firearms. As of 2015, 4.4% of the world's population resided in America (Lee par.3). That statistic is a stark contrast to the number of guns in America. According to Schaeffer, 40% of the world's arms are in America(par.1). Such a high rate of gun ownership is not necessary to maintain the security of the country. In numbers, the United States has a gun ownership rate of 121 per 100 civilians (Schaeffer par.4). With such high rates of gun ownership, there is bound to be a high rate of gun deaths. The people believe that guns are the only way to solve both physical and emotional disputes.

We could summarize the opening arguments by observing that we are raising a generation of Americans in violence. We have also armed the same generation with a significantly high amount of firepower. The worst part is that more than 15% of that population has mental problems hence they are a threat to themselves and the remaining portion of the people. As if that is not enough, not everyone in the population is paying for the inefficiencies of the system. The minority groups are suffering for the gun violence more than the majority group. Therefore, gun control is necessary to restore balance to the American society.

Independent Arguments for the Other Side

The first reason that the government should leave current policies in place is that they defend the right of every American citizen to protect his or herself including their property. The current systems are what makes America a great country because they guarantee the freedom of every citizen. Any attempt to take away the right for a person to own a gun is necessarily an attack on American freedom granted by the constitution and the founders of the nation.

The second reason that the government should leave current policies in place is that it increases the defense capability of the country. The founding fathers came up with the second amendment in a bid to ensure the safety of the American population against external threats. The best defense that America has against external threats and invasions is the guns and will of its people. The more the American people are armed, the safer they are as a country.

The third reason that the government should leave current policies in place is that shooters will still find a way to commit violent acts with or without the guns. The fact is guns don't kill people. The people that wield these guns are the ones that kill people. Therefore, implanting gun restrictions to prevent the wrong people from carrying out mass shootings is not going to deter their will. It is a pity that places such as schools are left defenseless, yet they have the most vulnerable population. It is pathetic to leave children unprotected and the only people that would defend them, teachers, are prevented from carrying guns.

The fourth reason that the government to leave the current policies in place is that the mass shooters like soft targets. Schools have been the scene of mass shooting because they are soft targets. There is reason mass killers do not attack police stations or military barracks. The people inside police stations and military barracks carry guns, and they know how to use them, probably better than the mass shooter. Therefore, taking away the guns from the majority of the population will only leave more soft targets for the mass shooters to attack.

Rebuttals and Responses

The big problem in the argument for the other side is that it does not consider the timeline for the implementation of these laws. Most of these laws were put in place when America was a lawless country. The second amendment was implemented when America had a significantly understaffed police force that could hardly cover a quarter of the country. It was necessary to arm the citizens because they could not count on the police force to provide the protection. However, the situation has changed. The New York police force alone is bigger than the militaries of most countries including the UK.

The big problem in the second argument for the other side is that it misunderstands gun control laws. Gun control laws are not about disarming the population. They are about ensuring guns end up on the hands of the right people. The argument assumes that gun control laws are going to take away guns from every American. Such a move would be dangerous even to the economy of the country. That is why gun control targets explicitly the people that have had a history of conviction and mental instability. These people pose a threat to the rest of the population if they are allowed to have guns.

The big problem in the third argument for the other side is that it does not consider the advantages that guns provide to the mass shooters. The fact is, it is harder for a mass shooter to kill ten people with a knife or baseball bat than to while using a gun. Guns are easy to use and provide the mass shooters with efficiency because they have to point the gun to a specific direction and pull the trigger. Gun control is about making it harder for the ill will people to commit their crimes.

The big problem in the fourth argument for the other side is that it does not consider the consequences of arming everyone. The moment guns are allowed in schools and other places that are currently prohibited; it increases the risk of mass shootings. It will be difficult to differentiate the right person from the wrong person because everybody will be carrying guns. When the shooting starts, there is going to be dead bodies. In a place such as a school, a good number of those dead bodies will belong to children.

Conclusion

In writing the paper, my own opinion on the topic has changed. In the page below, I will describe three ways that my thinking on the subject has changed because of writing the paper.

First, I once thought...