Gun Control Issue - Essay Example

Gun Control Introduction The topic of Gun Control is controversial and the debate surrounding it often emotional usually centering on differing interpretations of the Constitution. However, reasonable consideration of gun control issues illustrates that some form of legislation or control of guns is necessary if the violence in our nation is to be contained. There are numerous reasons why citizens no longer need to be concerned with carrying guns as they might have more than 200 years ago when the Constitution was written. There are no more threats of hostile Indian attacks and little remaining threat from wild animals; the government is stable and elected by a democratic process and the citizens of the country have the most powerful armed force ever assembled by humankind in addition to several levels of law enforcement that protect it. Rather than being a means of protecting society, the right to own guns has become a detriment to the safety of society which is in opposition to the intentions of the Founders. As this discussion will show, ‘the right to bear arms’ is no longer a necessary protection in the modern world. The Right to… Gun control generally works toward legislating and controlling the distribution of the weapon that kills the most people, handguns. Most gun control advocates are willing to compromise on the ownership of rifles and shotguns if handguns could be made illegal, thus statistically reducing the number of gun-related deaths occurring in this country per year. In this way, the right to bear arms is protected based upon the spirit of the Founding Fathers and so are the thousands of usually urban dwellers that die from handguns every year. Of course, it must be acknowledged that when reading the Second Amendment in context, only armed militias have the right to keep and bear arms. However, given the current strong emotions tied to the issue and the popularity of guns in this country, a compromise is the only solution. Individuals on both sides of the issue must learn to recognize that ideologies concerning guns and their possession are formed by a person’s innermost beliefs, cultivated by years of thought and shaped by life’s numerous experiences and family cultural context. An ideological debate causes a more emotive response in individuals than does any other. Political ideologies can never die and in politically turbulent times, such as these, are very much alive. The 9/11 attacks, abortion debate, the war in Iraq, the loss of civil liberties, global warming, health care, gay marriage, stem cell research and many other politically motivating subjects have ignited emotional ideological battles. Gun ownership ranks high among these political ideologies and to attempt to ban all guns would make these feelings even stronger. To make the case for upholding the widely perceived ‘right’ to bear arms by allowing rifles and shotguns of a certain length while banning handguns and assault rifles seems the sensible solution and a fight that could be won. This tact has proven effective in other countries such as Britain and many other European nations. Those countries that ban handgun use have a much lower homicide rate than does the U.S. while still enabling their citizens the right and ability to own a weapon (Reynolds & Caruth, 1992) Packin’ Heat The concept that easy access to firearms has an important impact on the homicide rates in this country is supported by a preponderance of evidence despite other attempts at reducing gun-related crime. Nearly two thirds of all homicides taking place in the United States involve a firearm. Changes in handgun laws were seen to have little to on impact on crime rates through the 1990s. This is not surprising based on the fact that most violent criminals do not obtain their firearms through licensed sources (Wright & Rossi, 1994). Other programs, such as gun buy-back programs have been proven to be similarly ineffective for a variety of reasons including intention for use, ease of replacement and probability of use for crime. Earlier gun control policies enacted in 1976 and 1982 had similar disappointing results. Concealed weapons laws have actually been shown to have a positive effect on crime rates by contributing to an escalation in crime (Loftin, McDowall, Weirsema and Cottey, 1991). Laws that attempt to control handgun ownership for law-abiding citizens do not work and have been shown to actually escalate gun crimes. A total ban accompanied with stiff penalties for violators is the only hope for reducing the carnage caused by guns; again, while keeping rifles legal to placate the strong political ideologies of those who interpret the Constitution out of context and likely always will. This compromise must be struck before this nation can ever be considered a civilized society. The Horrible Price of Bearing Arms Those who believe that handguns are not a serious threat and should not be banned because of a misconstrued interpretation of the Constitution should consider the statistics. In the year 2002, more than 3000 American children died as a result of guns, mostly handguns. These statistics suggest there are approximately 50 children being shot and killed each week or eight per day, one every three hours. Four to five times this many more children are wounded from gunfire. These numbers are startling enough. Now insert the more than 5000 children under 18 killed by guns in 2005 and the figures jump to nearly 100 per week, 15 per day and 1 child killed by gunfire every hour and a half. American children are more at risk from firearms today than the children of any other industrialized nation. In Britain, only 19 children were killed by guns in the entire year of 2005 and Japan reported no children killed by random gunfire within the same calendar year (“Statistics” 2005). Both of these countries have enacted strict gun control laws that eliminate handguns within the countries’ borders except in strictly defined categories. Entire generations of American children are dying in our own city streets in order to satisfy the selfish whining of those individuals who insist upon misconstruing the Constitution for a simple desire to create a personal and unnecessary arsenal or who have an otherwise malicious manipulation of the system in mind to the detriment of society at large. According to the statistics, 90,000 Americans under the age of 18 have been killed by gunfire in just 22 years (1979-2001) and the numbers have been escalating with every year. Death by guns is by far the greatest danger facing America’s children. In the U.S., 12 times more children 14 years old and younger are killed by guns than the combined total of 25 other industrialized nations. “American kids are 16 times more likely to be murdered with a gun, 11 times more likely to commit suicide with a gun, and nine times more likely to die from a firearm accident than children in 25 other industrialized countries combined” (“Statistics” 2005). These are very sobering numbers but the problem is much worse. More adults die as a result of gunfire than do children. At least 80 people in America are killed as a result of gun violence. Gun enthusiasts mindlessly mimic the concept that more guns will lead to less violence. According to their reasoning, if everyone were carrying a gun criminals would be too scared to commit crimes. This doesn’t match up with reasonable logic or the facts. “Whenever you have more guns in a society, you’re going to have more gun violence, period” (“More Guns” 2006). Refutation The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution states “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed” (“The Constitution”, 2006). This amendment, as were all of the first ten amendments to the Constitution, was added by the Founding Fathers so as to provide a more clear definition of the specific rights guaranteed to Americans as citizens of this country. Obviously, the right to own guns was of supreme importance to the Founders given that it was listed second only after the First Amendment explicitly guaranteed citizens the freedom of religion and speech. The Founders knew that by ensuring the right to own arms, citizens would have the ability to protect themselves from that which might endanger their life, liberty or pursuit of happiness. This could include bodily protection from persons and animals or from an oppressive government that threatened the freedoms outlined in the Constitution. Most Americans agree that the Second Amendment does allow law-abiding citizens to own guns Conclusion Statistics have proven what simple logic tells us, more guns lead to more violence and fewer guns, as in Japan and Britain, lead to far fewer instances of gun violence. When read in total and in proper context, the Constitution does not allow any one individual to own a gun nor does it guarantee anyone the right to own a gun or personal arsenal simply because they feel they want to. In fact the word ‘gun’ cannot be found in the Constitution at all. It refers to arms being provided to a general militia. A literal translation of this statement regarding arms might suggest we also have the right to possess nuclear or chemical armaments, but no one, including gun enthusiasts, would even think to argue this point. A line must be drawn somewhere and other countries have shown us where it should be. Works Cited “(The) Constitution: The Bill of Rights.” Cornell Law School. (2006). November 18, 2009 Loftin, Colin, David McDowall, Brian Wiersema and Talbert Cottey. “Effects of Restrictive Licensing of Handguns on Homicide and Suicide in the District of Columbia.” New England Journal of Medicine. Vol. 325, N. 23, (1991), pp. 1615–1620. “More Guns Equals More Gun Violence, Not Less.” Gun Guys. (2006). November 18, 2009 Reynolds, Morgan O. and  Caruth, W. W. III. “Myths about Gun Control.” Policy Report. National Center for Policy Analysis. No. 176, (December 1992). November 18, 2009 “Statistics: Gun Violence in Our Communities.” National Health Administration Health Information Network. (2005). November 18, 2009 Wright, James D., and Peter H. Rossi. Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms. Aldine de Gruyter, (1994). Read More