Are gun control policies effective or ineffective - Essay Example

Topic: Are gun control policies effective or ineffective? “Your cousin always used to be a guy in peace and didn’t have any issues or problems with others.” This is what my uncle told me about my cousin who died in a shooting by a guy who wanted to be in a gang. I always kept wondering why. He is a really friendly and sociable guy that everyone used to love and respect him. This issue of gun control measures becomes stiff every time there is an event of irresponsible shooting, which indicates that crime and deaths that are facilitated by the right of individuals to own licensed guns this issue disturb my mind. In this respect, it moved me to discover what the criminologists and legalists argue about this debate. Legalists argue that the right to own guns in some countries poses legal barriers to gun confiscation and on a contrasting perception, the right to own a gun improves individual security. Consequently, these legalists oppose gun restrictions, for which they justify that they oppose the freedom to own ammunition. On the other hand, criminologists have taken a different approach in perception of gun controls, arguing that strict gun control measures may result in reduced crimes and deaths caused by misuse of guns. This debate is of great importance to provide a way out of the continued misuse of guns, not only in the U.S., but also in the global perspective (Kopel 3). In most cases, the debates on crime related issues within the society only come up after a certain situation has occurred and possible loss incurred. This has been evident in many practical situations in the contemporary society. Most recently, the Obama administration stepped in to respond to school shooting cases, a move that prompted intensified gun control measures. It is very unfortunate however to note that the intensified gun control policies are untimely and thus, according to me, do not substantially prevent this act. To assure effectiveness of this control measure, timely implementation of policies should be done to prevent the probability of these events happening in the first place (Lott 32). I think the formulation and enforcement of these measures will ensure that the respective owners of the guns always be held accountable if used otherwise, other than the intended purpose of holding guns. This is supported by the fact that many of my friends are in possession of these guns illegally and without the knowledge of their parents. Implementing strict and effective gun control measures serve as a platform to reduce the increasing crime and irresponsible behavior. These irrational behaviors cause the deaths of many innocent citizens. According to criminologists, intensified gun control measure of disarming all citizens is considered the most applicable means of minimizing possible effects (Lott 45). I concur with this argument, since this irrational behavior is in existence in developing countries. All citizens seek protection from the state and other communal means of security. In fact, gun controls do not decrease crime; the gist of the matter lies with the enforcement of laws, which is the way forward to solve the dilemma of gun control. I really admire the communal relationship in developing countries; where each individual takes the burden of the other as if it is his own. In most instances, human beings are triggered to act the way they do due to the environment they find themselves in, not really out of their innate behavior but as environment derived behavior. According to criminologists, the possession of firearms by individuals is perceived to be a factor that contributes to the likelihood of gun fatality. When an individual finds himself in possession of a gun, which probably is not in use, he is moved to formulate ways to utilize it. In this perspective, the person ends up engaging in crime due to presence of unused guns, which could be controlled initially by restricting ownership of personal guns. This has been propagated by the fact that all individuals possess many pressing issues, but different people react differently to sorting out of the issues. Criminals in this perspective, find it easier to use guns to accomplish their missions. There are a number of reasons behind intensified gun control measures. One of the realistic rationales on gun control lies on the fact that citizens serve no military or police duties and should not thereby own riffles. The role of state is to offer a secure environment to live and operate in, thus no individuals should be allowed to own personal guns (Kopel 17). The state primarily reserves the responsibility to provide this function. In fact, personal security should be abolished and instead the state should assure provision of security to its citizenry. The ban on firearms saves citizens’ lives because it deprives the victims an easy way of suicide mission. According to various research, many peers use guns as a means of suicide due to stress. I have lost two of my friends through self-shooting. One of my friends was caught in a compromising situation, under which he found it unbearable to cope and ended up killing himself. The other one shot herself after a prolong confrontation with her boyfriend. The absence of firearms in the reach of an angry or depressed individual may be the difference between life and death and that is a critical point. Despite the negative impediments the possession of firearms has on the society, many are for anti-gun control measures. In fact, many peers understand it as a lifestyle and thus, those without the guns are considered to be of a lower standard. They end up formulating fire-armed gangs. In this respect, the initial objective of possessing a gun is consumed; which has also intensified school shooting. They also carry guns with them when going to public and social facilities as a protective measure. In the event of crisis, more individuals are injured and killed. It is unrealistic and absurd for legal advocates and anti-gun control proponents to argue that increased gun restrictions oppose the freedom of the public to own firearm. They also indicate that there is no correlation between the high number of guns among citizens and the crime rates as well as deaths. I challenge this argument because individuals utilize it to infringe other’s right. In this perspective, some use it to threaten others in demand for something in exchange for peace. Some of these threats actually actualize if the other respondent fails to cooperate. Guns are said to be the root cause of crime and death (kopel 15). I did not believe this proposition until I witnessed what happened to my cousin. After inquiring about the root cause of my cousin’s irresponsible behavior, it came as a surprise to discover that it is not because he lacked necessities, but the fact that he had gun with him made him to engage in such an act. According to me, effective measures should be taken to control the acquisition of guns. This is because individuals do not acquire proper training on handling and maintenance of guns. Many people have died others loose some of their body parts due to mishandling of guns. Most of this occasion has occurred due to mishandling guns under the influence of alcohol and drugs. From my training about guns, I discover that guns are very delicate and dangerous, thus proper measures and care have to be taken. The most appropriate way of carrying a gun should be in a pouch or a bag. In my point of view, I support implementation of strict gun control measures that will ensure that it becomes a nightmare for individuals to possess a firearm. From my observation, children have become orphans because of domestic violence that turned out fatal resulting from the misuse of the firearm by the parents causing their deaths. Alcoholism is not liable for the recent high crimes and deaths as indicated by gun advocates. I am not against the freedom to own firearms, rather, my argument points to what the gun can do in cases of uncontrolled anger. After the mass school and club shootings, am full of support to Obama’s move which, seeks to improve the gun control measures to ensure that such incidences are evitable in future. Works cited Kopel, David B. "The ideology of gun ownership and gun control in the United States." Quarterly Journal of Ideology, 3. (2004): 3. Print. Lott, John R. More guns, less crime.Chicago [u.a.]: University of Chicago Press, 2010. Print. Lott, John R. More guns, less crime.Chicago [u.a.]: University of Chicago Press, 2010. Print. Read More