Effectivness of-gun-control essay

Effectivness of-gun-control essay

• 1.
  Running head: EFFECTIVENESSOF GUN CONTROL 1 Effectiveness of Gun Control Name of Student Institutional Affiliation
• 2.
  EFFECTIVENESS OF GUNCONTROL 2 Effectiveness of Gun Control At the beginning of 2019, at least 17 people died in or around Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in the town of Parkland, south of the state of Florida. Nikolas Cruz, armed with an AR-15 assault rifle, fired at the students and staff of the school. Mass shootings have been on the increase in America. This epidemic of massacres, this scourge of school shootings after school shootings, only happens in the U.S.A. However, it is not a simple coincidence or bad luck, but because of lack of action. There are nations like Scotland and Australia, which in the past experienced similar tragedies, but enacted laws to strictly control the bearing of arms. The results are obvious for all to see: since the new gun laws were enacted in Australia, there has been no school shooting since 1996. While in Scotland, where a shooting took place in an elementary school that same year, gun control - which extended to the United Kingdom - has reduced gun crime by 75% in the last decade. Availability of guns amongst the public has increased mass shooting and other gun related killings in the USA, calling for the revision and application of the current gun control law. There are several fundamental arguments against gun control. The first is based on the idea that people have a fundamental right to self-defense against common criminals (Coates & Pearson‐Merkowitzz, 2017). That is, in a world where criminals have access to legal or illegal weapons, ordinary people should be able to arm themselves to defend themselves. Another argument raised by opposers is that it is people who kill people, not guns. However, it is crucial to observe that the ease in which guns are available has also made it easier for shooters to kill innocent people. It is for this reason why the Second Amendment was specifically enacted to deal with guns rather than knives or bombs. At the end of the 18th century, however, the idea that a permanent army was a grave danger to any society was much
• 3.
  EFFECTIVENESS OF GUNCONTROL 3 more common. The arguments of the 18th century behind the Second Amendment, of course, always focused on providing control over the power of the military power of the central government. These arguments go back far beyond the Declaration of Independence, at least until the days of the English civil war. In the 1660s, it was agreed that troops were necessary to maintain order, but few entrusted the task to the central government. Thus, a national militia composed of civilians who, as in the early days, would be summoned in times of need. The idea of the militia was always subordinated to the belief that a considerable permanent federal army was a threat to American freedoms, and that outside the Navy, the military force should be decentralized and subject to state and local control. These militias - once called to service - used to be subject to the control of government officials, whether at the local or state level. However, it was often assumed that the ranks of the militia would be occupied by resident experts in the use of their private weapons. This also meant private ownership of weapons. Besides, it assumed ownership of the weapons - and their dominance - at the level of military unity. The idea of militias as control over standing armies is still important because the defenders of gun control are now specifically pointing to the argument of the defense against tyrants in their campaign to further criminalize the possession of weapons. In all the mass shootings in America, the weapon of choice was guns. It is much easier and faster to kill people with a gun compared to killing people with a baseball bat. The idea that it is wrong to prevent Americans from getting any guns they want just because they could easily access other weapons is nonsensical. Killers should not be given more options for weapons to kill others. The other argument in favor of private ownership of weapons is the argument that weapons must be owned by a considerable portion of the population as a defense against an
• 4.
  EFFECTIVENESS OF GUNCONTROL 4 abusive government. This argument depends to a large extent on the demonstration that a permanent army controlled by the federal government is a threat to freedom. The American government should not only invest money in gun control but also invest more money in mental health. On 20th April, 1999, two students, Eric Harris (who was 18 years old) and Dylan Klebold (who was 17 years old), came to their school with an assortment of heavy weapons. The heavily armed 17 and 18-year-olds shot dead twelve comrades and a teacher in a matter of minutes before committing suicide in the library. Harris and Klebold's motives were never clarified. However, some point to the fact that they suffered from depression. On 21st March 2005, a 16 year old student by the name Jeffrey Weise shot nine people. He shot his grandfather and five other students who were students of a high school in Red Lake, Minnesota. He ended up committing suicide after an exchange of fire with the police. According to the press, the teenager was depressed and tried to end his life in May 2004. Cho Seung-Hui, a student originally from South Korea and a student at the University of Virginia and a victim of bullying, killed 32 people on the campus where he studied. He wounded another 29 in what is remembered today as the worst massacre in an American university. With an extensive history of mental problems, Seung-Hui was admitted to a psychiatric institution. Paranoid schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and psychopathy were some of the disorders he suffered and were not known until after the killing. In all these cases, the shooters had mental problems and were depressed. It is, therefore, crucial for the state to invest money and resources in the mental education of its students. Parents and family members should pay attention to adolescent behavior, especially when showing isolation and marked mood swings.
• 5.
  EFFECTIVENESS OF GUNCONTROL 5 Conclusion On average, in America, 106 people are killed with firearms every day, and 38,658 died from firearms in 2016 alone. This is a full-fledged human rights crisis that does not seem to want or be addressed. The first step to prevent weapons from falling into dangerous hands is to take common-sense preventive measures such as thorough background checks of people who want to buy weapons. It is proven to work: states with these laws have significantly lower arms trafficking. In 2019, there have been more than 40 attacks. Many of them have ended the lives of people, but not all appear in the news. Each carries a dramatic history of violence that arouses a heated debate about the possession of weapons throughout the world. There is need to constrain weapon viciousness by actualizing the prohibitive laws to claim and utilize a gun.
• 6.
  EFFECTIVENESS OF GUNCONTROL 6 References Coates, M., & Pearson‐Merkowitzz, S. (2017). Policy Spillover and Gun Migration: The interstate dynamics of state gun control policies. Social Science Quarterly, 98(2), 500- 512. Kwon, I. W. G., & Baack, D. W. (2005). The effectiveness of legislation controlling gun usage: a holistic measure of gun control legislation. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 64(2), 533-547. Masters, J. (2016). US gun policy: global comparisons. Council on Foreign Relations. Masters, J. (2016). US gun policy: global comparisons. Council on Foreign Relations. Pathak, P. (2017). The UN System and the Non-Governmental Organisations. Kathmandu Sch. L. Rev., 5, 153.