The Death Sentence Errors or Gun Control - Term Paper Example

Gun Control Introduction The second Amendment of the constitution of the US s that all UScitizens have a right to own and carry arms and ammunition and this right cannot be infringed upon (Uviller 21). There are different perception about this amendment of those who are against and even those who are in the favor of American citizens owning and carrying arms. Those in the favor are of the idea that all kinds of arms and ammunition should be allowed to be carried, those who are against ownership of arms are of the idea that certain weapons should be allowed to be carried and in extreme cases they believe that American society will be better off if no weapons are allowed to be carried. A moral and legal analysis of the second amendment can help in clarifying whether infringement of right of owning and carrying arms should be allowed or disallowed. Firstly, there are no rights that are absolute in nature; even the rights that Americans have been allotted by God and by the Bill of Rights have certain limitation. Similarly, the right of owning and carrying arms cannot even be absolute and can be infringed upon if the person having a particular right is indulged in the act of misusing his/her right. The absolute nature of the right of owning and carrying arms has been challenged by the courts itself for several times. For example during the Miller case which took place during the 20th century, the court ruled that citizens of US are only allowed to carry certain kinds of weapons and not all weapons (Uviller 21). Later in the case of Stevens v. US, the court ruled that citizens cannot be awarded the duty of militia until they become an official of the militia and the right of owning and carrying arms should only be limited to the militia (Carter 558). This writing will focus on the reasons due to which gun control laws should not be implemented. Gun control laws should not be implemented because law abiding citizens use guns as a self defense against goons who use are armed, secondly, guns in the hands of law abiding citizens deters crime and criminals and gun control laws can only control guns that are registered to the names of law abiding citizens and cannot control guns that are in the hands of criminal minds. Body Issues Associated with Guns According to the statistics of the period of 2010, 358 of individuals were murdered with the use of rifles, 6,009 were murdered through hand guns and 1939 individuals experienced being shot through an unknown firearm (FBI, 2013). During the same period, a total of more than 19000 suicides were committed with the use of firearms. Various costs associated with the use of firearms include medical bills, insurance cost, and costs experience by the US criminal justice system and during the period of 2010, these costs totaled to $174 billion due to incidences of violence conducted while using guns (Goldman, 2012). During the last month of 2012, a 20 year old guy named Adam Lanza went on a shooting rampage in the Sandy Hook Elementary School and took the precious lives of nearly 20 children and six faculty members of the school along with the murder of his own mom and later shot himself. These incidences clearly show that causing injury and killing others and oneself are the two main tasks of guns. Murders conducted with the assistance of a gun can be recognized as a 1st degree murder which means that the killer had intent of killing and a gun made the task easier. Other kind of murders that may take place includes: murder caused while another form of crime was taking place, murder of a friend due to passion and murders caused due to negligence that is criminal in nature. There have been various incidences where the murderer has no intention of committing a murder and was at the crime scene to commit another crime such as rape or theft, but the availability of an armed weapon makes the crime lethal. This means that individuals are not rational choice makers and at times they conduct behaviors which they initially do not intend to. Kates states that individuals living in a residence where a fire arm is available are five times at a high risk of going through a suicide and three times higher risk of going through a homicide as compared to households without firearms (Kates 690). Hemenway asserts in his research that individuals who use guns and report the usage as self defense are not telling the truth and are using guns in an illegal manner and he even supports the argument that individuals, who have kept guns in their houses, do so to threaten their spouses instead of keeping these weapons to secure their households (Krohn 489). Another issue is psychological issues and usage of guns. Individuals suffering from psychological issues cannot make rational decisions and fire arms in their hands can lead to unwanted circumstances. For example: James Hopes killed 12 individuals while a screening of a movie was taking place and his actions were associated with his psychological issues. Against Gun Control There are various claims made by the opponents of gun control laws, the main argument they use to support their perception is that guns are owned and used for the purpose of self defense. Gary Kleck a well known criminologist asserted that victims of crimes who have guns to defend themselves against criminals are less likely to experience loss of property and experience injury as compared to those who did not stand against a crime or stood against criminal activity without the support of guns (Valdez 106). He further asserted that victims who use weapons during criminal incidences are at a higher risk as compared to victims who do not use guns. Those who do not support gun control laws even are of the idea that increase in the number of guns in the hands of common population leads to reduction in crime rate. For example: John Lott asserted that the ease with which citizens of any particular nation are able to obtain and carry weapons are less likely to experience criminal activity and criminal activity in these regions even decline (Valdez 44). Lott’s assertions are in compliance with the deterrence theory of crime and he states that if laws on gun control are removed or relaxed, these laws will deter crime as while making a choice of whether to commit a crime or not, the criminal mind will make a choice not t commit crime because he/she is unsure whether the potential victim owns a firearm or not. Those against gun control laws even believe that strict gun control laws can only take away arms and ammunition from citizens who abide by the laws of their nations and cannot control guns that are in the hands of anti-socials. This is because a law abiding citizen will go through a proper procedure of obtaining a license and then owning and carrying a firearm instead of obtaining firearms in an illegal manner. On the contrary, criminals never go through the same procedure and they obtain guns from illegal sources and these guns are not registered to their names and they do not even have a license to carry these guns. They even obtain guns that do not even have a registration number or the number is removed. If gun control laws will be made, the authorities will only be able to take control of guns that are registered and licensed. Gun control laws are even against the law of equal treatment. Gun control laws only take away guns from citizens who abide by the law and not from the citizens who are deviant in nature. This means that the law itself is treating individuals unequally. Gun control laws cannot counter the issue of gun violence and its negative effects, still measures can be taken to ensure that the weapons are in the hands of the right people. Before issuing licenses and registering guns to any individual’s name, the law enforcement agencies need to ensure that they are handing a lethal weapon in the hands of the right people. This can be done by scanning people for psychological issues and by checking their previous criminal records. Certainly, there will be no reason for a law abiding citizen to carry a weapon if the criminals on the street are separated from their weapons. Conclusion Gun control laws have been debated for several years; these laws are again under scrutiny. Those in the favor of these laws believe that gun control laws will decrease the number of crimes that take place with weapons and these laws are needed as people cannot make rational choices so they should not own a weapon. Those against assert that removal of such laws will decrease crime rates, loss of property and decrease in injury of victims and these laws are against the second amendment. They even state that these laws do not take away weapons from the hands of the criminals. Works Cited Carter, Gregg Lee. Guns in American society: an encyclopedia of history, politics, culture, and the law. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-CLIO, 2002. Print. FBI — Expanded Homicide Data Table 8." FBI — Homepage. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Feb. 2013. . Goldman, Henry. "Shootings Costing U.S. $174 Billion Show Burden of Gun Violence - Bloomberg." Bloomberg - Business, Financial & Economic News, Stock Quotes. N.p., 21 Dec. 2012. Web. 28 Feb. 2013. . Kates, D B, and G Mauser. "Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide? a Review of International and Some Domestic Evidence." Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy. 30.2 (2007): 649-694. Print. Krohn, Marvin D.. Handbook on Crime and Deviance. Dordrecht: Springer, 2009. Print. Uviller, H. Richard, and William G. Merkel. The militia and the right to arms, or, How the second amendment fell silent. Durham: Duke University Press, 2002. Print. Valdez, Angela. Gun control. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers, 2003. Print. Read More