The issue of gun control has been discussed broadly, especially on whether the regulative policies ought to be more lenient or stringent to safeguard US civilians. Various studies have been conducted in an effort to resolve longstanding controversies regarding gun control and brutal crimes. Such studies have claimed that some of the states supporting gun ownership have experienced high rates of killings after the policy was passed, while the opposing states saw a decrease in murder rates. A wide pool of studies has revealed that a high rate of homicides in America emanates from gun ownership. Gun possession in the US has been highly criticized, as its impacts are dangerous.
It has been established that the American citizens possess more than 270 million guns. Moreover, it is estimated that about 38% of the families in the nation have at least one firearm (Andrés and Hempstead 95-103). The debate concerning guns accessibility and violence in America has been characterized by concerns regarding the right to own the guns and the task of the government to execute the necessities of the citizens and prevent violence and unnecessary killings. While the gun control advocates claim that limitless firearm ownership hinder the government from fulfilling its duty, the critics promote the possession of guns for sporting actions, self-defense, security against oppression, and hunting activities.
Comparison and Contrast of the Different Perspectives and Positions
The firearm legislation in the US is augmented by judicial interpretations of the law (Kellermann and Rivara 549-550). In addition to federal firearm laws, all the states in America have enforced their individual guns limitations. Every state has its laws concerning firearms. The constitutions of 44 of the states allow them to possess and bear guns (Dube et al. 397-417). Nevertheless, the context of these constitutional provisions varies. For instance, the state of North and South Carolina’s constitution starts with copies of the writing concerning the second amendment but continues with a ban on gun ownership. The majority of the states’ laws, with the exception of Hawaii, North and South Carolina, and Alaska, vary from the perspective of the American Constitution (Kellermann and Rivara 549-550). The circumstance majorly takes place in their explanation of precisely to whom the right refers to or by the inclusion of further or detailed limitations. Seventeen states refer to the right to maintain and bear guns as being acceptable.
The firearms regulation laws would reduce killings in the US. There have been about 464,000 reported deaths between 1999 and 2013. During this period, gun deaths were the leading source of the murders. As per various studies, executing both the federal and state laws would reduce the deaths that arise from firearms (Kellermann and Rivara 549-550). If guns control laws had been properly implemented, ill-fated use of firearms would decrease by 56.9%. Furthermore, the checks for ammunition acquisitions would lessen by 81%. Therefore, guns control policies may be of great benefit to the US citizens and the economy. High-capacity magazines ought to be banned as they frequently increase killings (Andrés and Hempstead 95-103). The magazines have been proven to have been employed in 50% of the 62 large shootings between 1982 and 2012 (Andrés and Hempstead 95-103). With the application of such magazines by criminals, the death rate rises. Moreover, numerous firearms regulation policies are required to protect the women from domestic abusers and prowlers. Studies assert that approximately five women are killed through illegal shootings on a daily basis in the US.
Firearms are hardly employed in self-defense. From the violent crimes done between 2007 and 2014, 0.79% of the victims protected themselves using a gun. Unfortunately, legitimately possessed guns are often stolen and utilized by criminals. Between 2007 and 2013, 1.4 million firearms were stolen from American households in the course of property offenses (Andrés and Hempstead 95-103). Firearm control policies could lessen the societal expenses linked with the gun violence. The costs of the gun violence could comprise legal services, therapeutic expenses, policing, imprisonment, and private security. Moreover, the doubling of the rate of homicide has been linked to the possession of guns (Andrés and Hempstead 95-103). It is evident that most of the adults, counting the gun owners, fully support firearm regulations, for instance, background checks, prohibition of illegal possession, and use of high-capacity magazines.
The possession of firearms in the US has resulted in increased killings in the last decade. It is apparent that both legitimate and illegitimate ownership of guns has negative impacts to the US civilians. The situation rises as the legally owned firearms are stolen and employed for criminal activities. The illegal ownership of guns could only be handled if only the US civilians could collaborate with both the federal and the state governments. When criminals perpetrate illegal possession of firearms, the citizens appear to suffer more compared to the law administrators. Therefore, the civilians ought not to hide any information that could be of great help to the law enforcement agents. The fight to curb the ownership of illegal guns should comprise all the US citizens. On the other hand, the legally possessed firearms should be properly kept and maintained to evade them from being stolen by the criminals.
The US is an industrialized nation and thus has the capacity to regulate illegal gun possession. The American government needs to come up with firm policies that include fines and imprisonment terms. It ought to reduce the provision of guns to the civilians even if it is legitimate. The criteria for allowing an individual to possess a firearm ought to be very strict and firm. There should be heavy penalties in case one’s firearm is found to have executed criminal activities. On the other hand, individuals who are found to own guns without the permission of the federal or the state governments should face heavy fines or serve a prison term of not less than five years. The implementation of such laws ought to be taken seriously to lessen immoral behavior with the application of firearms.
Andrés, Antonio Rodríguez, and Katherine Hempstead. “Gun Control and Suicide: The Impact of State Firearm Regulations in the United States, 1995–2004.” Health Policy, vol. 101, no. 1, 2011, pp. 95-103.
Dube, Arindrajit, Oeindrila Dube, and Omar García-Ponce. “Cross-Border Spillover: US Gun Laws and Violence in Mexico.” American Political Science Review, vol. 107, no. 3, 2013, pp. 397-417.
Kellermann, Arthur, and Frederick Rivara. “Silencing the Science on Gun Research.” Jama, vol. 309, no. 6, 2013, 549-550.