The subject of gun control is a thoughtful topic of discussion for a long period. Guns give the impression that it has a strange authority over people: passion takes over the mind most of the time. The theme of gun control including the push for severer laws within the United States is presently a hot-button issue. As instances of mass shootings such as those in Nevada, Las Vegas and Texas, and Sutherland Springs remain to occur nationwide (Masters, 2017). The incidences have posed the concerns of whether or not there will always be an appropriate time to debate how guns end up in the wrong hands and why these incidences are not taken very serious when considering the restriction of gun accessibility in addition to changing legislation. Since the annual death rates due to handgun use increase and people without background checks and permits have access to firearms, the government must make the gun control procedures stricter in the USA (Masters, 2017). However, the journal of criminal law and criminology must be highly applauded for shaping off some of the finest researchers on both sides of the argument over gun control in the United States. Gun violence is a common argument which can be reduce by increasing gun control laws in the United States. The argument has encountered a conflict that a rise in gun control laws would only lead to increased amusing violence. Hence, American life is affected by gun use and rules restricting the use of those firearms.
Gun Ownership in the USA
Overview of the Second Amendment
The evading and avoiding the issue on the use of the guns in the United States is only extensive in the case under the throw. As people continue to loss their lives in mass amounts as a result of a gun culture rooted in the Second Amendment including the right to bear arms. States is given the right to regulate firearm ownership following the provisions of the Second Amendment promoting “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms.” The carnage happening in the United States will remain keeping society in a position of fear and danger. As a result, it can even lead to a rise in gun ownership, worsening the problem (Masters, 2017). Hence, the need of severer gun control laws to be put in place so as to counteract the loss of feeling and safety of society, reduce the societal costs of gun violence from medical expenses, and reduce the chance of violence in individual conditions.
Overview of statistics
America’s firm justification of the individual right to bear arms, combined with the realism that America owns more than 300 million firearms. It resulted to a lack of shade or resolution in a discussion about how to avoid deaths that happen when guns are just as handy as groceries (Masters, 2017). Furthermore, United States is a leading nation in the rate of handgun possession by the general public; 88.8 in 100 citizens own arms in the USA, while 31.3 for Norway, 30.8 for Canada, and 6.2 for the United Kingdom.
Firearms as Cause of Death
Gun ownership-induced homicide
The influence of the firearm-related injury on life in the United States is overwhelming. As the gun homicide rate in the United States is 25 times greater when compared to other high-income countries. Amongst states, though, differences in gun homicide rates are substantial (Masters, 2017). For example, 10 out of 15 states which have the highest incidences of homicide, happens to lead in the homicide rate. In common states, gun homicides excessively affect societies of color.
Firearms misuse as suicide cause
While gun homicides lead media exposure of gun violence, the leading category of gun deaths in the United States is suicide. Half of all suicide cases include the usage of firearms; therefore, “limiting access to lethal means, such as firearms, among people at risk is part of a comprehensive approach to suicide prevention”. Between 2008 and 2007, suicide by firearm had accounted for 61 percent of all gun deaths.
Social Anxiety due to Handgun Use
Mass shootings in the United States are an effect of guns and gun possession. There seems to be an unfortunate sorrow and cycle of an outpouring of rage in the presence of mass shooting. Due to the conflict of having an honest debate about control of guns, and the steady fading of sympathy till the next mass shooting happens (Masters, 2017). The cycle of events only remains to evade the process of making Americans safer and stabilizing the impacts of gun violence. Gun violence countrywide costs society in higher taxes, lost wages, medical bills, reducing property values including the emotional and mental safety of a community (Masters, 2017). The cost of gun violence is greatly undiscussed but for when one occurs. While there is no one law or set of laws that can prevent mass shootings from happening, the effort has not even been made to take incremental steps that keep guns out of the wrong hands and increase public safety. When a mass shooting occurs, people become afraid, and understandably so.
Intimate partner violence and child exposure
Intimate partner violence involving a firearm is 12 times more possible to lead in death than similar occurrences that do not include a gun. Family violence commonly affects firearms and puts children and partners at risk. A gun in a domestic violence state can increase violence and threat severe injury for the victim of abuse.
Psychological impact on society
Distress in reaction to uncontrolled use of guns causes mental health problems. Studies postulates an almost universally undesirable response to firearm participation during violent victimization likened with violent discriminations including other or no weapons (Masters, 2017). These results highlight the necessity for determinations by medical and mental health specialists in addressing the possible sequelae of facing severe distress during firearm discrimination.
The View of Opponents of Stricter Gun Control
Risk of governmental intrusion
Stricter control over gun use implies a similar increase of control over other domains of life that contradicts the basics of democracy. The subject of gun control is not simply a question of liking or disliking guns. Nor is it merely around liking or not wanting control. Gun control should be about judging the efficiency of control, mainly of government control as applied through regulation. Antagonists of more gun control contend that there are already some 20,000 gun laws in the United States and that, as more laws pass, more gun violence occurs. However, proponents contend these to be primarily state and local laws with restricted effect and that without them, instance rates would be even higher.
Citizens’ need to obtain self-defense
Another area of dispute encompasses the use of guns in self-defense. Gun control proponents cite data that tell the number is more like 80,000 times, while opponents cite studies that say guns are used up to 2.4 million times per year for protection. Gun rights advocate that it is necessary to own a gun for personal protection (Masters, 2017). However, further Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) data found that using a gun or even the threat of using one has rarely deterred violence against a person. Guns within the home are not essentially symbolic of protection, but it does make for an increased risk of violence by the hand of a household member. Gun rights associations have also cited the need to treat guns as symbols of personal freedom and protection and as everyday devices instead of dangerous ones.
Drawbacks in the Current Controlling Procedures
Background checks are insufficient due to their procedural drawbacks and potential ownership of non-eligible individuals. It would require government databases which retain personal individual information on gun owners, names, addresses, criminal records, and mental health history (Masters, 2017). According to Lancet study, effecting federal universal background checks could decrease firearm deaths, background checks for ammunition purchases and gun identification requirements. Gun licensing laws were allied with a 14% decrease in firearm homicides, while rise in firearm homicides were seen in areas with right-to-carry and stand-your-ground laws.
Right to sell firearms
According to so-called gun-show loopholes, anyone, including convicted felons, can sell and purchase firearms without background checks, jeopardizing the general public’s safety. People who want to buy a gun should first undergo a background check and, after that, wait up to a month before being allowed to carry a firearm legally (Masters, 2017). Still, in the state of Chicago, whereby it is hard to obtain a gun legally, it is hilarious that where it is the easiest state to get the gun illegally. For instance, in Chicago, thousands of illegal firearms are in the streets, most of which are not registered.
In conclusion, it is evident from the arguments presented above portraying that have stricter guns does not surely relate with reducing the incidences of mass shootings and crimes. There is a converse relationship observed in states with more stringent gun laws, with the incidences of crime and armed robbery being measured the same in these cities. As leaders in the United States grapple with addressing the gun violence crisis, they should consider several policies and programmatic solutions that would significantly reduce the gun-related deaths, injuries, and crimes in this country. While it may seem like an intractable problem, gun violence is not inevitable, and Americans should not live with the fear of being shot. Despite controversy and alleged breach of constitutional rights, gun ownership should be controlled with stricter measures to reduce mortality and ensure citizen safety.
Masters, J. (2017). U.S. gun policy: global comparisons. Council on Foreign Relations. Web.