Ownership of Firearms in America - Essay Example

Ownership of Firearms in America The ownership of firearms has always been a controversial In recent times, it has become even more discussed due to the effects that have been due to result of private ownership of guns. Opinions have shifted at times in different directions but more often than not the firearms manufacturers have been at the receiving end. The reason of this is the increase in crimes involving shootings and misuse of guns for other than use for their legal purposes, the legal ones including for sporting activities, hunting and more commonly for self-defense. However, since the level of insecurity has been astronomical, it poses the question, should the private ownership of guns be allowed to prevail or should gun control laws be tightened? One of the main reasons why gun control laws should be tightened to restrict private ownership of firearms is gun violence. The topic is not restrained to gangs and common law breakers but individuals either in personal use or in groups. The level of mental stability, intent to use guns violently and resulting violence in the name of self-defense are some of the issues considered. Research estimates show that about 200 million firearms are in private possession. Though the uses vary, most of which are supposed to be legal, with such a large number of guns in the hands of the public most of whom have no restraint of any kind, gun violence is bound to arise and at high frequency (Cook and Ludwig 1). Injuries arising from firearms are the most prevalent in public health cases. They range from injuries inflicted through gun violence, to the one of the most used in litigation court battles against the gun industry, malfunction injuries (Lytton 13). The failure of the gun industry to adhere to design requirements in an effort to make them more user friendly and the loose laws governing gun ownership, has contributed to a problem of unrestrained occurrence of gun injuries. The seriousness of some of these injuries and the cost involved in treating them is enormous and therefore a financial burden to those mostly affected the middle and low-income earners. However, the reason why these injuries are unpreventable is the pervasiveness of gun control laws that would prevent this by restricting private ownership of firearms. Due to the use of guns, there is numerous numbers of deaths, which is alarming. In fact, apart from health caused deaths those resulting from shootings rank approximately second. Deaths of this kind are of murder, accidents, or suicides. Apart from murder, deaths estimates of research show that 1,356 are accidental deaths by gunshot and 19,590 are suicidal deaths by gunshot (Cook and Ludwig 15). This numbers prove only more the danger that is at private ownership of firearms since when the numbers are divided into groups the situation gets worse with underage subjects getting significant numbers. The cost of the police and the emergency services caused by the occurrence of gun violence are enormous for the states and especially for cities. At time when not only the country’s but also the global financial stability is in doubt and therefore state governments are doing all they can to reduce emergency services’ and police costs to salvage the situation, this is a pressing liability. The level of unemployment that has resulted from the situation and subsequent rise in criminal activities can partly be blamed for this. However, the prevalence of private gun ownership among the affected individuals lives no doubt of the root of the problem. Despite the amount of destruction that the private ownership of firearms has caused and is continuing to cause, the firearms industry has still found a way to manipulate the legal suits against it. This is through the presidential signing of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, giving the gun industry a unique exemption from most legal liability that might otherwise be imposed under the state tort law (Rostron 32). This causes deep concern since it shows that the National Rifles Association (NRA) can manipulate the legislative process to their advantage at the expense of destructive effects of guns in the country. Therefore, the constitution may be headed to become a tool of convenience for wrong doers other than serving the American public justice through the court process. The sale of guns used in crime to citizens has become common with negligent retail dealers. The prevalence of this illegal market is so common and discrete to the extent that serving criminals and juveniles have access to the guns and in most cases; they make up the largest number of beneficiaries from this sales (Braga and Pierce 25). The effects of this are interpreted through crimes such as robbery with violence and the consequential effects already discussed of injuries and deaths. Despite the efforts by cities such as Boston to use, the market disruption strategy to divert illegal diversions of short guns from retail store the problem is too great and complex for the use of such simple methods to solve it. Finally, with the number of guns in a city, state or even a region has had its consequences. Where studies have shown that, the proportion of gun use in violence varies according to gun ownership in that place. Moreover, a study conducted in eight cities on gun use in robbery, homicides and assaults shows that with high proportions of gun use in one crime it tends to have high proportions of use of guns in other crimes (Newton and Zimring 45). This study alone is a perfect example of the fatality that private gun ownership could result to. On the other hand, opposing proponents question the effectiveness of the dispossession and illegalization of the private ownership of guns. The gun industry has mainly based its argument on the sensationalism and exaggeration created especially by the media claiming it is typical in selling news and entertainment. Therefore, most of the incidents and cases that are presented against it contain a lot of false representation of facts. In a bid to redeem themselves and prevent the passing of laws that restrict the private ownership of firearms, they offer a couple of advantages and reasons of letting the situation remain as it is and instead take another direction of effective measures. Primarily, overwhelming citizens have not seen anyone real life threatening another person with a gun, any shooting taking place and anyone defending them with a gun by displaying it or even using it (Lott 1). Therefore, the frenzy and exaggeration in play is a display of false account of events. Furthermore, if the gun control laws were to be changed according to the initial argument of this discussion, it would be a misinformed decision with serious implications on the gun industry that in itself is a violation of their rights and the justice served will be unsubstantiated. The proponents against private ownership of firearms and the media have been unrealistic and unreasonable in the notion that they give the public. The illegalization of private ownership of firearms is a serious violation of the right to self-defense of an individual. The uncertainty of life, the rise in crime and the occasional poor response to cases such as robbery, rape and theft make the ownership of a gun an important requirement for every American citizen. The opposing proponents of this ownership have clearly overlooked this important right and the serious implications that its violation could result. In the same spirit, the American constitution may be bent towards one right despite another being violated. The existing control laws if properly enforced, they could be effective enough to curb the existing misgivings of the gun industry. Between 1975 and 1882, the same became a possibility, one element of this being the creation of gun free areas, which were a reality (Ludwig and Cook 15). Furthermore, the USA has already many laws governing the use of guns in existence but lukewarmly implemented by the concerned authorities. Therefore, there is no need to pile up more laws, which, if the recent past is to be considered, may never be implemented. Solving the problem by just doing away with one aspect that contributes to it will be taking the short route that is not promising in bearing the desired results. In the spirit of justice and fairness, it will be demeaning to law-abiding citizens by punishing them together with the wrong doers since majority gun owners have not used them for any illegal purposes. This can be reflected in other sectors where sensation and unreasonable judgment leads to the suffering of innocent people. Instead, those found guilty to have used guns and other firearms for wrongful purposes should face the full force of the law especially by being banned from ownership of any firearm whatsoever. Subsequently, every individual will be responsible for his or her actions especially when using a gun. In conclusion, despite the reasonable and well-presented argument from the gun industry the problem of misuse of guns is less than solved. The solutions are unrealistic or futuristic while the problems brought about by gun ownership are real and are currently taking place. In all seriousness to solve the firearms problem guns should be illegalized in private hands. Works Cited: Braga, Anthony and Glenn Pierce. Disrupting illegal Firearms Markets: The Effects of Operation Ceasefire on the Supply of New Handguns to Criminals. Washington D.C.: National Institute of Justice, 2005. Print. John, Lott. More Guns Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010. Print. Lytton, Timothy. Suing the Gun Industry: A Battle at the Cross Roads of Gun Control and Mass Torts. Detroit: Michigan University Press, 2007. Print. Newton, George and Francis Zimring. Firearms and Violence in American Life. Rockville: National Institute of Justice, 2006. Print. Phillip, Cook and Jens Ludwig. Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms. Washington D.C.: National Institute of Justice. 2003. Print. Rostron, Allen. Law, Guns and Money: The Rise and Fall of Tort Litigation against the Firearms Industry. Kansas City: University of Missouri Press, 2006, Print. Read More