Research Paper on Gun Control Issues

Introduction

In consideration of the laws of the U.S, the creation of the Bill of Rights in 1791 triggered various and arguments involving the issues of gun control. Within this coverage, there are two sides centered in the discussions whereby one side argues and delivers claims for gun rights while the counter team contends of the gun control. The gun rights entail the rights to keep and bear these firearms. Similarly, gun control implies the set of policies and laws governing and providing regulation to the manufacturing, selling, transfer, modification, and possession of guns by the civilians in an issue that has stirred many feeling and opinions to different people. According to various studies pertaining the rates of deaths rate due to gun violence in the world, United States is among the highest nations with a high death rate toll relation to gun violence. With such a fact, various interventions are seeking to resolve the issues and as a result, triggering the argument relating to gun control issues (Blocher, 295-355).

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Within the context of gun control, the occurrence is not only an issue but many, whereby to some people gun control is a crime occurrence while to others it is a rights issue. In its framework, it is an occurrence that is affecting various phenomena, for example, it is triggering other safety issues, education issues, political issues, racial issues, among others that play a significant role in the overall community setting. The gun control issues are an event that has been there for the longest time now since it is steering debates between individual to an extent they lose the primary meaning which in one way or the other involves the safety of the civilians.

Recently, there are many occurrences of gun violence whereby people no longer feel safe at some point (Crebs et al., 847-848). Over the past periods, gun violence in the United States is claiming tens of thousands of lives and injuries on an annual basis. For example, in 2015, firearms were used to kill 13,286 people resulting in an approximation of 1.4 million people being killed with the use of guns between 1968 to 2011. However, in the past few days, the Florida school mass shooting is among the deadliest school massacres that claimed 17 lives while on the other hand there were seventeen non-fatal injuries. Also, there had been approximately 1624 mass shootings in the US in 1870 days. With such gun violence tolls, it is evident that gun control is essential; however, in its implementation, various issues are affecting the occurrence since people have different reactions and statements concerning what needs doing and what ought not to be done in the intervention of gun control.

The gun control issue is a happening that is fueling various sentiments by individuals supporting gun rights while others are delivering anti-gun sentiments. These arguments are gaining the basis on the numerous incidents with their roots apply through the philosophical statistics as well as with the facts revolving around how the guns are affecting people and the entire society as a whole. Through the intervention, it is significant to understand that minor developments and pitfall are in consideration relating to this occurrence; however, there are still hardships in deciding what to do and what not to do regarding the difference in gun rights and gun control. Under this epitome regarding the gun control, the parties or both sides of the arguments are rendering various cases which in one or the other, they gain basis on multiple facts. The frequently discussed arguments on both sides of the gun control issues include;

With consideration of the gun control issues in the context of the 2nd Amendment, there are various happenings. According to the gun rights positions, or individual against the gun control, they deliver that, the issue relating to the gun control is an occurrence rendering an attack to the 2nd amendments. In the context of the bill, it stipulates that a well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the civilians to own, keep, and bear arms, shall not face any infringement. With the amendments, the history of the US rendered the need to have such a law since they felt that it was fundamental liberty for every civilian abiding by the regulations. Moreover, the supreme court is withholding the law whereby they are affirming to the reading whereby the citizens have the right to keep and bear guns for any occurrence and use in self-defense and against any tyranny or violence (Rosenthal, Lawrence, 1187).

However, as a counter-argument still concerning the involvement of the 2nd amendment, it implies on specific occurrences. The gun control position basis on the use of the word "a well-regulated militia" in the 2nd amendments which deliver on the actual meaning of the right to keep guns. In the U.S historical setting of the need for the potentials of citizens to render the protection of the principles of the constitution is essential especially when a large government and union of sovereign states are new (Rosenthal, Lawrence, 1187). In the current government setting, the idea of having militia is infeasible and unnecessary since the sovereign states are stronger and working thus, no one needs the firearms for militia use since the 2nd amendment authorizes the use of the arms under the "militia" purposes.

Also, there is the issue regarding the infringement of the fundamental rights of the civilians by other bodies. About the fundamental rights, the logic behind "partial restriction" of fundamental rights is a happening that is stirring the debate and argument pertaining the gun control issues. With consideration to the gun rights position, it delivers that there can be no partial restriction of a fundamental right without its essence being lost. In one of the cases, individual use the guns for self-defense; however, some of the persons tend to overstep and use the weapons for criminal purposes. As for this case, it brings the intuition whereby, law-abiding citizens cannot be asked or be forces by the legislatures to give up their freedom just because other people may take advantage of the happening. Thus, rendering a partial regulating for the ownership of guns is not an option (Spitzer, Robert J, 203-237).

According to the gun control advocates, they deliver a different opinion from that, the gun control position relies on the implication that the US values life and it is the responsibility of every individual to ensure that loves are protected. Through the existence of guns amidst individuals in the society, there are chances of the threat to the general welfare which is the duty of the government to protect. In maintaining the American values and protection of the human nature, guns are not essential since in most cases, weapons such as machine guns are to kill thus, the gun control side of the argument implies that in maintaining a proper society owning guns is not essential.

However, in addition to the argument relating to the gun issues, other occurrences are implying on the predicament that, "Guns do not kill people; people kill people." Under the arguments about the ideology behind the gun control issue that gun does not kill people but people kill people; the advocates of the gun controls are advocating the point wrongly whereby they are blaming the gun violence on the tools used in the perpetration (Harding, 85-105). The intentional homicides are increasing every day; however, they are not rising just because there is a gun but because of other issues arising in the society. There is evil existing between people as people are killing other whether they have weapons or not. Hence the argument against guns needs deeper intervention and not just to the people.

In counter-argumentation, different statistical data about the gun control suggests otherwise. For example, in nations like Australia, it is evident that they had a 59% decrease in cases of gun violence or other gun-related homicides after the passage of various laws regarding gun control. In the rules, they suggest strict gun control laws that have limited the access to the guns. Among other happening, it does not mean the Australian criminal found new ways to kill, but they quit that altogether. As a result, the happening indicates that there is essence in the introduction of gun control laws since there is evidence that strict regulations would help in curbing the gun violence.

Conclusion

Within the American culture, it is evident that guns have been a significant part especially with consideration to the culture. It is essential that we need to keep our communities safe and let the government perform its duty of protecting the people. Many individuals are facing and being affected by the recklessness in using these firearms. It is also imperative to maintain a proper balance between the gun rights and the gun control since they both are aiming to ensure that there is no loss of life due to recklessness in using these weapons. The arguments are playing the critical role in finding a level ground aimed at reducing gun violence even though the issue is deeply rooted in the American history.

Works Cited

Blocher, Joseph, and Darrell AH Miller. "What is gun control? Direct burdens, incidental burdens, and the boundaries of the Second Amendment." The University of Chicago Law Review (2016): 295-355.

Crebs, Jennifer, Angela Sauaia, and Ernest E. Moore. "Gun violence in the United States: a call to action." Journal of trauma and acute care surgery 80.6 (2016): 847-848.

Harding, Richard W. "Gun use in crime, rational choice, and social learning theory." Routine activity and rational choice. Routledge, 2017. 85-102.

Rosenthal, Lawrence. "The Limits of Second Amendment Originalism and the Constitutional Case for Gun Control." Wash. UL Rev. 92 (2014): 1187.

Spitzer, Robert J. "Gun control: Constitutional mandate or myth?" Moral Controversies in American Politics. Routledge, 2014. 203-237.