Gun Lives Don’t Matter john tracy
Jose was a kind man who has never done anything to hurt anybody. He migrated to San Francisco by walking all the way from Mexico! He was a hardworking man. When he arrived he got a job in the work force constructing houses and years later he got married. One night Jose was going to hangout with some friends in the mission. Before he left home his wife asked, “Are you sure it’s a good idea to wear that blue sweatshirt?” “Hey, I’m a good man who would never hurt anybody.” Jose was walking past a dark alley when all of a sudden he felt several bullets shoot into his chest. He was murdered that night in the mission by a gang who had mistaken his identity. The next morning the headlines on the newspaper read, “Another innocent man shot in the mission.” This is one of many shootings that have been occurring all over the country.
Currently a citizen in the U.S. is allowed to legally own a gun. The origin of this law is from the Bill of Rights made in 1791, it is also the second amendment of the U.S. constitution. The exact law was “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This law is not relevant because citizens are no longer in danger from war. Gun control is important because they are deadly weapons that have been used to kill many innocent people in this country. In order to keep our country safe I think it is important that the government does not allow citizens to carry assault weapons. They should make owning guns either extremely difficult or illegal.
The U.S. government should make it illegal for citizens to own guns. One reason for this is that there is no need for a citizen to own a gun. The main reason civilians have guns is to protect themselves from danger. But in situations of mass shootings having a gun can make the situation more deadly. Here is a passage that presents information on civilians and gun control, “None of the 62 mass shootings between 1982 and 2012 was stopped by an armed civilian. [41]Gun rights activists regularly state that a 2002 mass shooting at the Appalachian School of Law in Virginia was stopped by armed students, but those students were current and former law enforcement officers and the killer was out of bullets when subdued. [41]Other mass shootings often held up as examples of armed citizens being able to stop mass shootings involved law enforcement or military personnel and/or the shooter had stopped shooting before being subdued, such as a 1997 high school shooting in Pearl, MS; a 1998 middle school dance shooting in Edinboro, PA; a 2007 church shooting in Colorado Springs, CO; and a 2008 bar shooting in Winnemucca, NV. [42] Jeffrey Voccola, Assistant Professor of Writing at Kutztown University, notes, "The average gun owner, no matter how responsible, is not trained in law enforcement or on how to handle life-threatening situations, so in most cases, if a threat occurs, increasing the number of guns only creates a more volatile and dangerous situation." [43] [http://gun-control.procon.org/] This evidence shown through statistics, facts and expert opinions shows that in most situations guns fail to protect the citizen and succeed in making the situation more dangerous. This is because most citizens are untrained and not experienced with a gun. Making gun ownership illegal for a citizen matters because citizens are not police or soldiers and do not know how to use a gun. Citizens also should not have guns because most guns are meant for intense combat and war not civilian life. For example, Civilians, including hunters, should not own military-grade firearms or firearm accessories. President Ronald Reagan and others did not think the AR-15 military rifle (also called M16s by the Air Force) should be owned by civilians and, when the AR-15 was included in the assault weapons ban of 1994 (which expired on Sep. 13, 2004), the NRA supported the legislation. [48] The Second Amendment was written at a time when the most common arms were long rifles that had to be reloaded after every shot. Civilians today have access to folding, detaching, or telescoping stocks that make the guns more easily concealed and carried; silencers to muffle gunshot sounds; flash suppressors to fire in low-light conditions without being blinded by the flash and to conceals the shooter’s location; or grenade launcher attachments.[49] Jonathan Lowy, Director of Legal Action Project at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, stated, "These are weapons that will shred your venison before you eat it, or go through the walls of your apartment when you’re trying to defend yourself… [they are] made for mass killing, but not useful for law-abiding citizens."[http://gun-control.procon.org] This quote is saying that the law allows civilians to own advanced military grade guns that are specifically meant for war not civilian self defense. It is also saying that technology has made guns a lot more dangerous and deadly because back then there were no automatic weapons, so therefore you could not walk into a room and kill 20 people in 10 seconds. This connects back to my claim because if the government lets citizens access military grade weapons without proper training they could be endangering many innocent lives. This matters because guns not only protect YOU they also endanger the life of innocent people.
Guns may feel safe in your hands but how about in the hands of the person next to you. In our country it is legal to own a gun and therefore making it easy to purchase. The point is that guns are frequently purchased by criminals, stolen by criminals or illegally bought. Here is a quote about criminals obtaining guns, “ Legally owned guns are frequently stolen and used by criminals. A June 2013 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report states that almost all guns used in criminal acts enter circulation via initial legal transaction." [18] Between 2005 and 2010, 1.4 million guns were stolen from US homes during property crimes (including burglary and car theft), a yearly average of 232,400. [19] Ian Ayres, JD, PhD, and John J. Donohue, JD, PhD, Professors of Law at Yale Law School and Stanford Law School respectively, state, "With guns being a product that can be easily carried away and quickly sold at a relatively high fraction of the initial cost, the presence of more guns can actually serve as a stimulus to burglary and theft”. http://gun-control.procon.org/
Even if the gun owner had a permit to carry a concealed weapon and would never use it in furtherance of a crime, is it likely that the same can be said for the burglar who steals the gun?" This shows the amount of guns that get into the wrong hands and how simple it seems to be. This means that if the government does not make guns illegal or harder to purchase than we see more crimes involving guns, more aggravated assaults, and more criminals stealing weapons. Many gun supporters will say that in order to purchase a gun you have to go through background checks, this is sadly incorrect and this is why, “A majority of adults, including gun owners, support common sense gun control such as background checks, bans on assault weapons, and bans on high-capacity magazines. According to a Pew Research survey in Mar. 2013, 83% of all adults surveyed and 79% of gun-owners; 86% of people living with a gun-owner; and 74% of NRA households approve of background checks for private and gun show sales. [27] As much as 40% of all gun sales are undocumented private party gun sales that do not require a background check (aka the "gun show loophole"). [28] 56% of all adults surveyed approve of assault weapon bans and 53% of all adults surveyed approve of high-capacity magazine bans. [27] 90% of adults with a gun in the home approve of laws to prevent the purchase of guns by the mentally ill, and 60% approve of a federal database to track gun sales. [27] Don Macalady, member of Hunters against Gun Violence, stated, "As a hunter and someone who has owned guns since I was a young boy, I believe that commonsense gun legislation makes us all safer. Background checks prevent criminals and other dangerous people from getting guns." Most people approve of background checks and not allowing certain people such as the mentally ill to purchase guns. But there is still little being done about criminals purchasing weapons especially when guns are bought without background checks”.[http://gun-control.procon.org/]. This matters because criminals are the cause of shootings and assaults so not letting them purchase guns by making them illegal is essential.
Another reason that I think owning a gun should become illegal is that the 2nd amendment is way outdated. It is outdated because it was made in 1791, back then guns were way less dangerous. The first ten amendments of the constitution make up the Bill of Rights. The second amendment read, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Here is a quote about the history of the right.“The Second Amendment is not an unlimited right to own guns. Gun control laws are just as old or older than the Second Amendment (ratified in 1791). Some examples of gun control throughout colonial America included criminalizing the transfer of guns to Catholics, slaves, indentured servants, and Native Americans; regulating the storage of gunpowder in homes; banning loaded guns in Boston houses; and mandating participation in formal gathering of troops and door-to-door surveys about guns owned. [1] [2] In the June 26, 2008 District of Columbia et al. v. Heller US Supreme Court majority opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia, LLB, wrote, "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose… nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."[http://gun-control.procon.org/] This quote is saying that when owning a gun there are a lot of restrictions. This means that society does not trust people who are not of authority to bring guns to certain places because of safety. If we do not trust people in certain situations to have guns then why should we let them have guns anywhere? This matters because since we know that there are dangerous people who will commit crimes with guns if we let them then we clearly need to put up a law against owning guns.
We would not be the first country to make guns illegal. In fact the countries that made these laws have had huge success. Let’s take a look at Australia, a country that started banning guns in 1996 immediately after a mass shooting had occurred. The statistics following up this law are staggering. “The main part of the policy was a huge buyback of more than 600,000 semi-automatic shotguns and rifles. These counted for one-fifth of all firearms in Australia. The country’s new gun laws prohibited private sales, required that all weapons be individually registered to their owners...homicides by firearm dropped 59 percent between 1995 and 2006, with no increase in non-firearm-related homicides. Suicides by gun dropped by 65 percent. Studies found a close relationship between the sharp declines and the gun buybacks. Robberies involving a firearm also dropped a lot. Meanwhile, home invasions did not increase, despite fears that firearm ownership is needed to prevent such crimes. But here’s the most stunning statistic. In the decade before the Port Arthur massacre, there had been 11 mass shootings in the country. There hasn’t been a single one in Australia
since.[http://gun-control.procon.org/] This quote is saying that because of all the gun buybacks gun violence dropped vastly. This means that putting strict laws on guns can make a difference. This should matter because if it worked in Australia it might work in the United States.
People will say that gun control is unnecessary because relatively few people are killed by guns, “According to the CDC's "Leading Causes of Death Reports," between 1999 and 2013, Americans were 21.5 times more likely to die of heart disease (9,691,733 deaths); 18.7 times more likely to die of malignant tumors (8,458,868 deaths); and 2.4 times more likely to die of diabetes or 2.3 times more likely to die of Alzheimer's (1,080,298 and 1,053,207 respectively) than to die from a firearm (whether by accident, homicide, or suicide). [4] The flu and related pneumonia (875,143 deaths); traffic accidents (594,280 deaths); and poisoning whether by accident, homicide, or suicide (475,907 deaths) all killed more people between 1999 and 2013 than firearms. [4] Firearms were the 12th leading cause of deaths for all deaths between 1999 and 2013, responsible for 1.3% of deaths with 464,033 deaths.[4] Internationally, the claim that the United States has a major problem with firearm homicides exaggerated. The United States is ranked 28 in international homicide rates with 2.97 gun murders per 100,000 people in 2012.” This is saying that guns are not a leading cause of death, so therefore we should not worry about controlling them. Although you cannot deny the fact that guns do not kill as many people as tumors do,this is not important because a lot of people are killed by firearms. “More than 30,000 people are killed by firearms each year in this country. More than 30 people are shot and murdered each day 1/2 of them are between the ages of 18 and 351/3 of them are under the age of 20 Homicide is the second leading cause of death among 15-24 year-olds And the primary cause of death among African Americans of that age group”. Firearms may not be the leading cause of death but that does not mean gun control is unnecessary.
A common response from anti-gun control people is that guns do not make murderers or in other words, guns don't kill people, people kill people. Here is an anecdote that gives a summary of what they are talking about. This anecdote is in the opinion of a widow. ¨The person who killed my husband, Chris, worked in an armory with daily access to every caliber of high powered weaponfor years. He chose to kill when he got out of an environment of accountability and drug testing.Simply having a weapon did not make him a murderer. His life choices did. What red flags did he display?¨(Kyle,3)This is basically saying that in no way did having access to a gun influence his decision to kill. But saying this statement as if it were applicable in any situation is false because, None of the 62 mass shootings between 1982 and 2012 was stopped by an armed civilian. [41]Gun rights activists regularly state that a 2002 mass shooting at the Appalachian School of Law in Virginia was stopped by armed students, but those students were current and former law enforcement officers and the killer was out of bullets when subdued. [41]Other mass shootings often held up as examples of armed citizens being able to stop mass shootings involved law enforcement or military personnel and/or the shooter had stopped shooting before being subdued, such as a 1997 high school shooting in Pearl, MS; a 1998 middle school dance shooting in Edinboro, PA; a 2007 church shooting in Colorado Springs, CO; and a 2008 bar shooting in Winnemucca, NV. [42] Jeffrey Voccola, Assistant Professor of Writing at Kutztown University, notes, "The average gun owner, no matter how responsible, is not trained in law enforcement or on how to handle life-threatening situations, so in most cases, if a threat occurs, increasing the number of guns only creates a more volatile and dangerous situation." This is saying that guns were nearby the offenders therefore influencing them to kill, the gun makes the murder.
As you can see the government should make owning a gun a lot more difficult or illegal because the law allowing gun ownership (2nd amendment, bill of rights) is outdated. Also, guns could get into the wrong people’s hands and cause harm to others. The last reason is that there is no reason for a citizen in this country to need an assault weapon. Everybody should care about this issue because the victims are all citizens like you and I. Crimes involving guns can happen anytime, anywhere that is why we need to have better control over guns. If we allow all citizens to own guns violent civil wars and terrorism could happen like in countries like Syria. A proposal I have for this topic is to support people in favor of gun control such as, the mayor, governor, district representatives, presidential candidates, organizations and supervisors that want more gun control. For example, San Francisco supervisor, David Campos, recently proposed a law that would penalize gun owners who fail to store their weapons in a lock box or trunk of a car. Voting and supporting people in favor of gun control will make a difference of what laws are passed about guns. You can also contribute to organizations to further your knowledge on gun control.
No comments:
Post a Comment