Sample English Essay on Gun Control

Gun Control

Gun control is a contagious issue that has raised an array of arguments among various stakeholders. Gun control refers to the regulations put across to check the production, distribution, sale, and the use of firearms (Branas, 2034). These laws are associated with regulating the possession and use of guns among the public. Public firearm disposal is associated with insecurity, homicides, and other related crimes. According to the U.S Department of Justice 2009 report states that of the 5,340,000 crimes committed in the United States in 2008, offenders visibly armed with a gun (Bryant, 412) committed 436,000. Since there are already illegal guns among the citizens, there has not been a consensus on how to maintain security by effecting gun control policies. Therefore, this paper argues for a disarmament process where the federal government should form a gun manufacturer and owners union or organization so that they can be registered and be recognized.

Possession of firearms illegally is a huge risk to the public security and it can have some detrimental impacts. There are a number of policies that have been introduced such as disarming the public by recovering the guns at people’s disposal. However, this process has raised a number of challenges to the authorities and it proved to be quite challenging. The Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA) was formed in 1961 and reorganized on 2005 to 2006 in a move set to reduce the number of illegal guns (Branas, 2037. The agency was faced with challenges where some officers relinquished their positions citing understaffing. To curb this problem, gun manufacturer and owners association would be at a better position to enhance disarmament. This can be achieved by requesting all the gun owners both legal and illegal to register under the organization so that their issues can be addressed collectively. Firstly, they need to be assured of their security; that is, they will not be victimized or have any problem with authorities. This will attract their attention and they will be willing to register with the association to obtain licenses.

The second step will be registering them in order to gain trust from the rest of the people having illegal guns. Actually, this trap will seize the manufacturers more than the users because they need to be safe in order to conduct their operations. Manufacturers are the ones responsible for the increased possession of illegal firearms (Bryant, 412). This is because if the supply is cut off, the demand will definitely dwindle. Thereafter, the association should be allowed to garner a number of members who represent the number of people having the illegal firearms. The governments and the ACDA should ensure that it has all the information about these producers and the gun users. From this point, the government has the best chance to force all the registered members to relinquish their arms in a peaceful process.

As a matter of fact, this argument has some limitations and questions that arise. For instance, how will the gun users be convinced to come out in the limelight? Actually, it is quite a challenge for they will be adamant at first but when they see others come out; they will feel the urge to register. It is logical to create a relationship with the criminals and later subdue them rather than forcing them (Hemenway, 269). This is because they will keep running away and the issue of gun crimes will remain high. Therefore, the best way to disarm the public is by creating an organization that will bring them closer to the authority.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

Branas, C. C. “Investigating the Link Between Gun Possession and Gun Assault”. American Journal of Public Health 99 2009.  (11): 2034–2040.

Bryant, M. S. Carter, G. L., ed. Holocaust Imagery and Gun ControlGuns in American society : an encyclopedia of history, politics, culture, and the law. Volume 1 (Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO). (2012).  pp. 411–414.

Hemenway, D. . “How to find nothing”. Journal of Public Health Policy. 2009 30 (3): 260–268