Critical Analysis of Gun Control Issue - Assignment Example

Gun Control Introduction Gun control is considered as a process of enacting and following the laws that help in regulating gun ownership by the public, and the security officers while, not on duty. People have different understanding and interpretation of the gun control laws; with most claiming that citizens need to be allowed to carry guns even in public places for self-defense. Carrying guns in public creates dangerous situations because the security personnel find it hard to identify the criminals, and those who illegally own weapons. From statistics, approximately 40% of the American homes while about 80% of Americans support the proposals to the government to allow the citizens to own guns for self-defense. Gun ownership by the citizens offers a good basis for crimes to be exercised in a nation, and more threatening, they subject the lives of children to high risks. Although supporters are to the idea of offering security to their families and property, they fail to consider the impacts of children having access to the weapons (Richman, npag). The harm that they may cause to their lives and/or to the lives of other is unbearable. This material aims at investigating and exploring the concept of gun control, and this will be with respect to the causes of gun ownership among citizens, the impacts of gun ownership, and more importantly the effectiveness of gun control laws. The concept of safety of children will also be investigated to affirm the negative effects of lawfully or unlawfully owning weapons such as guns. The observation that larger populations in the developed countries such as United States of America, England and United Kingdom have licenses to own and use guns for their defense suffices to show the need to investigate the consequences of holding guns to the citizens or general public. Additionally, approximately 81% of Americans have the perception that there should be gun control, and the ability of the leaders to address the issue of guns in the country determines which leaders for whom theythey vote. Such an aspect creates the need to investigate the element of gun laws in the developed, developing and underdeveloped nations as a way of determining the effectiveness of gun control laws to the security of people. Background Gun control is understood to be the policies that regulate and control manufacture, sale, ownership and modification of the weapons, and also the use of the firearms such as guns. The gun control policies vary depending on the country across the world. For instance, the United Kingdom has very strict laws and limits on ownership and licensing of guns, while USA has less and weak restrictions on gun ownership. However, the policies vary with respect to the states of USA because the laws and policies governing one state vary in one way or another from other states. The advocates of gun control have varied arguments as to why ownership of the gun by citizens is dangerous to the security of children and the general public. On the other hand, those individuals who are against gun control laws and policies claim that the gun control laws do not reduce gun-related irregularities such as injuries, murder, and suicide. These opponents of gun laws claim that some specific gun control regulations may violate individual liberties. Approximately 875 million small firearms are distributed to the public, the security personnel, and the armed forces globally. Among these, it is observed that 75% that accounts for 650 million firearms are owned by civilians across the world. Only 200 million of the firearms are controlled by the security agencies such as the military, cops and general police forces. It has also been confirmed that the unlawful groups have between 2 million and 10 million small firearms. This information is terrifying because it seems that the civilians have more weapons than the law enforcing agencies and the military forces. It is an indication that to some extent the law enforcement agencies may fail to control security in situations where the public may decide to produce and use their weapons forcefully (Beth, p. B.1). Irrespective of the fact that 97% of the civilians owning guns and weapons have legal licenses, the use of these weapons does not require legal authorization to fire and cause death, harm or injuries to individual user or to the public. People and organizations have failed to recognize the importance of enacting laws that control the ownership and use of guns among the civilians, and allow the security forces to use guns. It can be considered as the failure of the governments and their respective security forces to offer reliable and dependable security to the citizens that civilians seek for authorization to own guns. This follows the claim that the civilians use to support their desire to have guns legally, that their security, the security of their families and that of their property is at risks, and thus they need guns for protection. They claim that no criminal will commit a crime or cause insecurity alarms where security agencies are, and since they are not in the homesteads of civilians, their securities are at risk (Mahony, p. A.1) This argument is significant and valuable from one perspective, because the aspect of civilians having guns in their homes helps them to fight criminals where the security personnel cannot reach. Such implies that for gun control laws and policies to be effective, the internal and external security of nations needs to be stable to a level that civilians feel protected by their governments. Critical Analysis According to some data regarding gun ownership and use in U.S.A., over 100,000 people are shot annually, where 72% of these individuals comprise of violent killings in the use of guns as the murder weapon. This high death rate among the citizens as a result of ownership and use of guns is immensely facilitated by the gun control regulations that countries exercise. It follows that the gun laws in United States are not very strict with respect to ownership and punishment. Comparing the death rates resulting from guns as weapons between United States of America and Japan where the laws are very strict in ownership and the punishment, it is observed that only 4 people were killed in 2012 in Japan as a result of use of guns. Irrespective of the small population of Japan as compared to USA, it is observed that the per capita death rate is approximately 1,000 times higher in the U.S. There are some countries where the sale and manufacture of realistic imitation firearms are completely banned, and this follows the realization that there are organizations that are illegally selling firearms to civilians. According to the gun control laws in some countries such as UK, it is relatively difficult to own a gun or related firearm because of the toughness of gun control laws. It is essential to note that United Kingdom has the toughest gun control regulations and policies while United States has the weakest gun control policies because it is a constitutional right to bear arms. The process of getting a license to own a gun is complicated and demanding because one has to prove to the security agencies that they are not a danger to the society. Every stage or phase of the process of licensing civilians to own guns is designed and principally followed to lower the chances of the guns falling into the wrong hands that may cause insecurity to the public. On the contrary, the purpose of licensing guns is to allow the police officers determine whether the guns used in crime scenes were legally owned or not. Such helps in reduction of crimes resulting from the ownership of guns among the civilians (Gabrielle &Schneiderman, p. A. 19). Considering the aspect of the security and safety of children and gun control, it is evident that the children are at very high risks in situations where the gun control laws and regulations are not strict. The number of children reported dead for mishandling of guns is increasing in various countries due to the laws that are exercised in respective nations. For instance, the number of child death in 2012 in U.S was 259, while in 1996; the number was 140 children who died after accidentally being shot. This increase in a number is an indication that more people own guns currently as compared to a decade ago. It is also observed that about 1500 children in United States are hurt or injured by guns every day. There are numerous deaths that are caused by allowing children have access to guns and firearms. Irrespective of the fact that a legally authorized people keep these guns within themselves and around their homes suffices to show that children might mistakenly use the guns as playing tools causing harm or injuries. Illuminating Synthesis Various arguments and debates have been evident in most countries that have strict gun control laws and policies, especially where the military personnel are not allowed to carry guns or weapons unless they are on duty. There are situations when the military is attacked while in camps because they do not have the right to be owning guns unless while in the mission. Thousands of military personnel and security agents have been killed in different countries because of the inability to own gun to defend oneself or protect the citizens. The fact that criminals consider the security agencies their enemies regardless of whether they are armed or not suffices to show the need for the military personnel and law enforcing officers to be legalized to carry guns for their individual protection and protection of the public. Governments need to understand that the security of their respective nations lies with the security personnel they recruit and train, and because they are recognized individuals who are trained on how to use weapons, they are the only people who need to be legalized to own guns. It is essential to comprehend with the fact that the gun control laws and regulations refer to the actions that are taken by the governments to regulate through the legislature the sale, purchase and licensing of guns to civilians. There have been several political and social debates over the question of how much control does the government need to exercise to minimize the harms, injuries and deaths that results to ownership and use of small firearms by the public. There are different conclusions that have been arrived upon regarding the question, and according to statistics, approximately 51% of people find it wise for less restrictions to be subjected to the gun licensing and ownership. This is an indication that though they support the gun control laws, they need some amendments to be made on the regulations to allow some civilians to own guns for their individual, family and property safety. Considering the votes on whether the laws need to be changed with respect to different countries and states, approximately 69% of civilians globally never supported weakening of the restrictions against gun ownership. This creates an understanding that the gun control regulations and laws are effective and efficient in control of crimes across the world because they allow the security personnel to identify and recognize gun owners as criminals. The 1999 Columbine high School Massacre and the 2007 shootings at Virginia Tech were conducted by guns that had been licensed or legally acquired. These are some among other evidences that the supporters of gun control laws put across to show the dangers of allowing civilians to own and carry guns. The discussion about gun control laws and regulations tend to revolve around the sociological, ethical and legal dimensions. From the social science perspective, ownership of guns plays a major role in reduction of crimes, because the civilians are able to fight the criminals using the guns in the absence of the security personnel. Establishing an argument from this perspective, it can be argued that licensing of guns should have fewer restrictions provided the security officers are sure that the people they allow to have guns are not dangerous to the society. However, the fact that it is difficult to recognize criminals from previous criminal records because there are some criminals who have never been caught is enough to argue on the contrary that restrictions need to be strong. From the ethical view point, the right to bear weapons against the protection of citizens and prevention of crime should be treated as a crime. This element presents the claim that only the security officers and law enforcement officers are allowed to carry weapons in public and only when on duty. On the other hand, the legal dimension of the gun control depends on the constitutional rights of citizens. For instance, in the U.S. the constitution allow the civilians to own weapons for their defense. Individual Perception towards Gun Control High rates of deaths caused by deaths and associated injuries are contributed to lack of adherence to the laws of gun licensing, and sometimes due to weak gun control policies such as those evident in United States of America. In answering the question of whether gun control policies elevate, decrease or have no impacts on the rates of gun violence, there is need to understand that the major reason for designing these policies is to improve securities in respective nations. The state of knowledge, experience and expertise of using the weapons is low to the civilians because the training that they undertake of using the weapons is very little. As argued by some specialized, training and frequent use of guns subjects the user to more skills of using a weapon. However, this is not attained to people who are offered guns without training, and it significantly contributes to carelessness in use of guns. The other possible factor that contributes to variation in gun violence is wealth (Stockman, p. A.8). Most of the civilians who own guns are the economically stable individuals and people who have influence in the society such as politicians. Such implies that there is an uneven distribution of gun ownership rights, and the major cause of this difference is that the poor individuals are associated with crimes and irregularities. Ownership of guns significantly contributes to the high rate of suicide, and most of the guns used for such practices are those that are manufactured and sold illegally. Such is another fundamental reason why governments need to enact and implement gun control laws and policies. The rates of homicide have been observed to increase every year in various nations. According to findings from Harvard Injury Control Research Center, "The rate of gun homicide and the total homicide rate was significantly correlated with levels of gun ownership," (Thurber, p. A.1) And this observation was common to all nations of the world that have high-income or the developed countries. The rate to carry guns has significantly increased the rate of crimes in countries where the gun control policies and laws are not strict, and where the punishments for crimes committed by individuals owning guns are not severe. Irrespective of the arguments presented by the advocates of the gun control laws and regulations regarding the negative contributions of civilians holding gun, there are positive effects of allowing the public to hold and carry guns in public. According to claim presented by economists such as John Lott in his material, More Guns, Less Crimes, allowing civilians to carry firearms significantly helps in eradicating crimes because it is hard for the criminals to realize who is carrying a firearm. It is also very hard for criminals to know or detect the homes that have guns and those that do not have, and this creates fear in them to commit crimes. Hence, the level of crimes is reduced due to allowing citizens to own and carry guns in public (Maura & Perry, p. AA1). When dealing with criminals, it is essential to hide some of the elements that can make them realize that one is a law enforcing agent. This argument aims at drawing the concept of allowing security officers to carry guns even when not on duty to reality because they can quickly address various crimes. In one way or another, I support the gun control laws and policies, but to some extent I find that they need to be amended to allow some individuals such as security agents to carry guns in public. However, considering scenarios such as the Cumbria shootings where Derrick Bird at 52 years shot and killed 12 people and injured 11 people. He was a licensed gun holder. Another terrifying scenario involved a licensed gun holder Thomas Hamilton, who in 43 years killed 16 young children and their teacher in 1974. Conclusion In the main, the gun control policies and laws are very essential to improving security of the nation. This conclusion follows the observation that weapons legally owned by civilians have been confirmed to be used in committing crimes, suicide, and homicides. The gun control laws vary in different countries, with the United Kingdom having the toughest gun control laws while United States of America is considered to be having the weakest gun control laws depending on the states. In UK, getting a license to own and carry guns in public involves complex processes as one has to prove that they are not a danger to the society. However, in USA one may claim that it is their constitutional right to bear arms for self-defense and for the provision of security to the society and the general public. Irrespective of the observation that there are some positive benefits associated with licensing and ownership of guns among civilians, there should be significant restrictions or ban. This implies that it is the responsibility of individual governments to consider implementing gun control laws as a way of controlling crimes in their respective nations. They should understand that allowing citizens to own and carry guns in public is an indication that the security officers are failing to provide security. The defence and internal security officers are the only trained personnel who have knowledge, skills and experiences of using guns, and it should be considered as their sole obligation to fight crimes through the support of citizens who provide information and not taking law into their hands. Works Cited “Guns Galore Won’t Make Military Bases Safer Places.” USA TODAY.2014, p. A.1. . SIRS Issues Researcher.Web. 7th Dec. 2014 Dolan, Maura, & Tony Perry. “Court Rules Against State Gun Limits.” Los Angeles Times.2014, p. AA.1. . SIRS Issues Researcher.Web. 7th Dec. 2014 Giffords, Gabrielle, & Eric T. Schneiderman.“Working Together for a Safer America.”Washington Post.2013, p. A. 19. . SIRS Issues Researcher.Web. 7th Dec. 2014 Kassab, Beth. “Florida Tough on Kids’ Gun Safety-But on Paper Only.” Orlando Sentinel. 2014, p. B.1. . SIRS Issues Researcher.Web. 7th Dec. 2014 Mahony, Edmund H. “Assault Weapons Ban Upheld.”Hartford Courant.2014, p. A.1. . SIRS Issues Researcher.Web. 7th Dec. 2014 Richman,Josh. Large-Capacity Magazines: Second Amendment Right or Gun-Violence Scourge?San Jose Mercury News. 2013. n.p. . SIRS Issues Researcher.Web. 7th Dec. 2014 Stockman, Steve. “Ban Turns Soldiers into Soft Targets.”USA TODAY.2014, p. A.8. . SIRS Issues Researcher.Web. 7th Dec. 2014 Thurber, Jon. “Witty Reagan Aide and Gun-Control Advocate.”Washington Post.2014, p. A.1. SIRS Issues Researcher.Web. 7th Dec. 2014 Read More