The high rates of people owning guns in the

The idea or rather concept of gun control is one whose facts and statistics can well be conducted through surveys. However, the accuracy of such studies being done heavily depends on the willingness of the respondents to speak the truth about the issue. It is almost hectic to come up with such statistics because most of the respondents usually are afraid of giving out information that may be used against them for incrimination purposes or any other purpose. America is one a county that is quite exceptional when it comes to the idea of gun rights. It is controversial and unique in the sense that it falls among the few countries where the owning of guns is legally accepted, and there is a provision for such in the constitution. Amongst the developed nations where such regulations exist in the constitution, America has been proven as to be the one with the highest number of individuals owning guns and the violence that result from such is higher in America than it is in any other country. The following statistics are a proof of how America leads in the vices that are committed as a result of people owning guns. First of all, America has been proven to be having six times as more homicide cases as any other Canada which is the next countries that follows it amongst the nations that legalize owning of firearms. The united states lead other countries when it comes to a case that is related to gun-related homicides, and one is tempted to think of why such would be the case? Further research and statistics provided have proven that the United States has an outlier on the cases of gun violence and such is so because the number of guns it owns as compared to other countries is higher (Siegel et al., 2014). Also, another interesting fact is that America has half of the civilian-owned firearms in the entire world. The events that have been presented above are a clear indication of the high rates of people owning guns in the United States and such poses high risks to the lives of the people there since it is a security threat. Besides that, another interesting fact about the United States and the issue of gun controls is out of the 391 million people in the United States, 371 of these civilians own firearms, and 146 million of these people do own handguns. This is quite a shocking statistics that should not be taken lightly (Spitzer, 2015). This is so because it is in some way a threat to the security of the people as well as a possible chance of increased crime rates. From the statistics that have been provided above it is evident that the government of America has had the issue of gun control out of their control. The kind of dangers that have been tagged along with the issue of civilians having to own guns demonstrate the urgency with which stricter gun laws ought to be enacted. It indeed is an alarming fact that the American government ought to look at with utmost seriousness. This paper seeks to have a comprehensive argument over the issue of gun controls, and while doing so, the paper will look at various aspects of the concepts of gun control primarily in the United States since it is one a country that has controversial cases of homicides and these are related to the gun controls. Besides, the rates of the increment in civilians owning guns pose is dangerous to the people living in the united state, and that too will be discussed in this paper. (601)To begin with, in December of 1971, the second amendment to the Bill of Rights in the Constitution was reported. The Second Amendment expresses, “An all-around directed Militia, being important to the security of a Free State, the privilege of the general population to keep and carry weapons, might not be encroached.” The aspect of this amendment that should be accentuated is ‘effectively or rather accurately managed.’ These two words give the contemporary legislative issue a set of which it was composed. It is vital to understand that diverse eras mean distinctive political airs. In the eighteenth century, the Founding Father’s dread was a large central government. The possibility of a union of sovereign states was new and conceivably hazardous. Despite the fact that the dread of private state armies was significant in the eighteenth century, this dread is insignificant today. The opinion of a civilian army recommends a military power from a common populace. This clarifies the Second Amendment is predicated on gatherings, not people (McGinty et al., 2012). The reason this alteration fixates on bunches is that now ever, the danger of a standing armed force was amazingly predominant. The idea of a state army focuses on a nation’s armed force of self-defense that was under an administrative specialist. Shay’s Rebellion represents what a state army was expected to be utilized for. Shay’s Rebellion was a 1786-1787 uprising in Western Massachusetts that happened before the development of the Constitution that had the changes over the gun rights (Spitzer, 2015). This resistance, would not have appreciated the sacred security. The Framers would have in all probability seen this as an armed mob, which just as said some time recently, is chosen to be altogether different than a very much controlled civilian army, which would be under sacred security. This defiance likewise exhibited the peril guns and armed gatherings acting without legislative constraints could pose to the public. Therefore, the Framers chose it was important to separate between an outfitted crowd and a local army. The difference between the two groups mentioned above had to be created and such was as to ensure that there are no future conflicts that arise from the two people because they had a lot of similarities in them. In the Founder’s view, on the off chance that you don’t have direction, you have political agitation. Just second to oppression, the rebellion was the truth they dreaded most. The contemporary comprehension has turned out to be profoundly unique. Permitting this commonness of weapons and guns to go unregulated has prompted a guns savagery scourge that has spread from urban communities, for example, Boston, MA; New York, NY; and Orlando, FL. By and large, every privilege has reasonable control, including gun rights. (453)Additionally, as indicated by the Centers for Disease Control in 2011, roughly 30,000 individuals die every year through crimes, suicides, and accidents in the United States because of a gun. Besides, right around 33% of gun deaths are the aftermaths of suicide. As already expressed, advocates for gun rights contend that guns do not kill individuals but rather individuals kill themselves. Additionally, this was invalidated. On December fourteenth, 2012, sometime before the shootings at Newton took place, Connecticut; an unhinged Chinese man strolled into a grade school and unpredictably assaulted everybody around him, hitting 22 youngsters with a knife. Strict gun control laws in China kept this man from acquiring a gun. Undoubtedly, a firearm would have caused more harm. Eventually, this event is an indication that guns have made killings or rather murder cases less brutal. The United States has the most astounding rate of gun ownership, with an approximate of 89 guns for every 100 individuals. In this manner is it obvious that in 2011, handguns caused the deaths of 10,728 individuals in the U.S., contrasted with 52 individuals in Canada, 48 in Japan, 34 in Switzerland, and 8 in Great Britain (Spitzer, 2015). The U.S. has been noted to be or instead to depict a lot of uniqueness in the developed countries world with regards to gun control. The Gun Control Act was agitated by the deaths of John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and Robert Kennedy. The individuals that have been mentioned above were iconic people and thus the fact that their deaths were caused by gun cases was a reason for cause of alarm. The Gun Control Act tagged along strict measures; permit necessities were extended to incorporate all merchants, and a comprehensive record keeping was expected from them. This was one a move by the government to reduce the number of people that are allowed to possess the guns in the United States. The sale of handguns was limited or rather reduced to nothing beyond the state lines; some of the people that were found to be incapable to own guns included the individuals convicted of a felony, those that had mental issues, the drug dealers among others.  Rifles and shotgun deals through the mail were as well prohibited. This was so because of the lack of security to watch over the activities conducted over the mail. Before the enactment of the legislation stated above, individuals had to sign to show that they were twenty one and above; the recommended age for an individual to possess a gun (McGinty et al., 2012). This is a clear indication of the support for the idea of gun control in the United States as it depicts an increment in the stringency nature of the laws that govern the act of possessing guns. (460)Notably, historical verification, similar to all other gun control policies, has controversially been questionable. A historical verification incorporates looking into criminal, business, and money related records of a man or association. Gun control advocates contend in the interest of an individual’s well-being. Record verification does not look just at the mental health of the purchaser but rather goes ahead to look into more factors. Around 80% of the overall population accuses the mental inaccuracy of the shooter. This is a clear or rather precise indication that an individual’s mental status ought to be verified before they could purchase a firearm this is so because studies have proven that they also contribute to the cases that are reported as a result of mishandling of guns (Coffee Jr., Sale, & Henderson,  2015). Such regulations have made the gun control legislation stricter and such is depicted from the fact that mentally misfit individuals have been unable to acquire guns. Liquor and drug abuse have significant implications for the conduct of an individual. Besides, drug abuse has been proven to increase an individual’s likelihood to cause violence thrice as much as mental misfit would do. This, implies that for one to possess a gun, they have to prove that they are not a party to the above conditions. Another strategy that has also been employed is the regulation or rather restriction of the magazines that are of high capacity. A high-capacity magazine is a technical and sustaining gadget that holds more than a specific number of rounds of ammunition. Later on, when this approach has diminished the dissemination of high-limit magazines, there is a solid potential for a decline in mass homicides (Spitzer, 2015). Among gun control advocates, a prohibition on high-limit magazines is favored because this can lessen the quantity of shots accessible on account of a mass shooting, thus conceivable gun deaths. For instance, the Los Angeles City Council passed a law that would deny city inhabitants from having handgun or rifle magazines that surpass ten rounds of ammunition. This shows the rationale that most firearm control advocates take after; more than ten rounds of ammunition as to have other intentions besides self-protection. The last central strategy for gun control is a restriction or rather a ban on ambush weapons. This ban limits the capacity to utilize certain sorts of guns which are seen to be a specific risk to open security. The reason for weapon direction is not just about safe stockpiling and the abuse of guns, yet also to controlling what weapons are available for use. (419)Contrarily, gun rights advocates contend that a restriction on attack weapons would likewise be an intrusion of rights, with regards to the fact that if a military intrusion happened, ambush weapons would be the citizen’s last resort for safety as well as security. To gun rights advocates, restricting assault weapons would make people feeble in times of danger or case of an impromptu attack. The gun rights perspective asserts that the expression “assault weapons” is a political affair bound to bring about mixed reactions among individuals. The perplexity encompassing this approach concerns what sort of guns can qualify as assault weapons. The sorts of weapons that are prohibited are always being altered after some time; however, what stays predictable is that programmed or rather automated guns are not secured and that firearms are not restricted given how quick they shoot or how capable they are. The meanings of what weapons are prohibited are rather given the name of a firearm, or on whether a gun has certain embellishments or segments (McGinty et al., 2012). In spite of the fact of its radically unique nature, the Republican and Democratic gatherings are similarly American. In any case, the two sides neglect to understand that gun regulation is likewise similarly American as firearm ownership. Through inspecting the two interpretations of the Second Amendment, probing into the connection among violence and guns, and investigating two points of view on gun control policies, it has turned out to be certain that gun regulation can serve the benefit of all, as opposed to gun rights. The idea of firearm-related violations makes supreme avoidance incomprehensible; however, that does not imply that policy that can diminish brutality ought to be disregarded. The majority of the firearms considered assault weapons are self-loading rifles. This is so because of their automated nature (Swanson, 2015). Such characteristics in these weapons make them a great risk to the people that handle them as well as those close to the people having them. Gun rights supporters contend this is not real because the firearms utilized as a part of the boycott are quick firing rifles, which are less hazardous than programmed guns. (353)Summarily, nobody can question that guns are a substantial piece of American culture. Therefore, the inquiry is whether a piece of our way of life should cost such a large number of pure lives. Each U.S. community has been influenced by the rash utilization of guns; through accidents, suicides, and homicides. In a significant portion of the rural areas in the United States, weapons are a piece of everyday life. The people in the rural areas or rather regions of America are used to using guns daily to the extent that it has become part of them. Most importantly firearms influence everybody in one way or the other; weapons can be a weapon of self-defense if used in the right way and are in the correct hands, yet an instrument of destruction if they fall in the wrong hands. The ultimate goal is to identify what the company seeks to achieve through empowering of the gun rights or control policies but still, there is a need for gun control policies being enacted strictly. (173)Works Cited Coffee Jr, J. C., Sale, H., & Henderson, M. T. (2015). Securities regulation: Cases and materials.McGinty, Emma E., et al. “News media framing of serious mental illness and gun violence in the United States, 1997-2012.” American journal of public health 104.3 (2014): 406-413.Siegel, Michael, et al. “The relationship between gun ownership and stranger and nonstranger firearm homicide rates in the United States, 1981–2010.” American Journal of Public Health (ajph) (2014).Spitzer, Robert J. Politics of gun control. Routledge, 2015.Swanson, Jeffrey W., et al. “Mental illness and reduction of gun violence and suicide: bringing epidemiologic research to policy.” Annals of epidemiology 25.5 (2015): 366-376.Zimring, Franklin E. “Firearms and federal law: the Gun Control Act of 1968.” The Journal of Legal Studies 4.1 (1975): 133-198.


I'm Angelica!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out