For and Against Gun Control

Gun control has been one of the most contested issues to face the nation for many years. It has received even more national attention following some of the most tragic domestic shootings within the country in recent years.  From the events such as the recent mass shootings and domestic terrorist attacks, both advocates and opponents of stricter gun control laws have voiced their opinion and divided the nation.  Both sides claim that their arguments are based upon sound logic and should be adhered to by policymakers.  This dividing issue tests one of the fundamental pieces of legislature from the Bill of Rights, the 2nd Amendment, and has sparked a prolonged and heated debate as to the extent of how and who is protected by it. Through the presentation of both sides’ premier arguments, it is apparent that regardless of which side an individual finds him or herself on, some action must be taken to resolve this complex, controversial issue.

Advocates for gun control base the majority of their arguments around the notion that firearms are dangerous and serve no purpose for simple recreational use.  One of the major arguments is based upon the idea, therefore, that the elimination of firearms would reduce the number of homicides and other deaths that resulted in the use of a firearm (Zimring, 1968).  The basic idea in play is built upon the idea of reducing the medium by which the accidents and crimes are carried out as a means of reducing the problem.  Advocates also use the media and national tragedies as a means of pushing their ideology (Stein, 2013).  These sorts of incidents are brought to the public’s attention and used as a means of questioning the ability for the general population to have access to such tools of destruction (McGinty, Webster & Barry, 2013).  What usually follows is a reference to another nation that has implemented an effective means of gun control such as the United Kingdom where the banning of firearms has resulted in the dramatic decrease in gun-related deaths since the aggressive anti-gun laws were put into effect (Wodarz & Komarova, 2013). Finally, to combat the notion that the 2nd Amendment protects individuals’ rights to carry firearms, advocates of gun control will make claims of how the Amendment was not necessarily speaking to the individual but was rather in reference to the collective society, drawing upon the clause about organizing and maintaining a militia (Levy, 2005).        

Opponents to gun control push their own agenda.  First, they claim that the ability to own a firearm is a means of self-defense, as it can act as a deterrent for criminals who are motivated mostly by self-preservation (Lott, 1998).  They also argue that gun control will not stop the violence as many criminals will find means to carry out crimes due to lack of police forcing and general access to firearms even if they were illegal (Levy, 2011).  Opponents of gun control will even argue that advocates have misinformed the general population to slander the idea of firearm possession by making false claims about the ease of access to firearms and the way in which certain criminals obtained them (Kopel, 1991).  They will claim that the advocates have falsified statistical information about gun violence and accidents such as the number of deaths of children, both accidental and purposely, the means by which criminals obtain firearms, and the inability for the current government to deal with gun violence because of outdated, ineffective legislature (Lampo, 2000).  The opponents claim they are merely exercising their 2nd Amendment rights and do not “deserve the mean-spirited campaign of abuse to which they have been subjected,” (Kopel, 2000).  The majority of the efforts of opponents to legislature are based upon defending their position against the claims of the advocates.  

By examining both sides of the argument, it becomes clear that the right course of action to be taken is to enforce a stricter law for the possession and control of firearms within the nation.  The logic presented by both sides has its points, but the rationale behind better gun control laws appears to be more beneficial to the general population because it is aimed specifically to protect individuals from gun violence and does not deal mostly with countering points made by its opposition, choosing instead to point out flaws in their logic backed by statistical evidence.  Obviously, stricter laws will not completely eliminate the crimes involving guns, but this does push the concept for making individuals more dissuaded from owning firearms and would, hopefully, eventually reduce the amount of them within the nation to the point where gun violence would be significantly lower than it is today.   

References

Kopel, D. B. (1991, March 30). Gun foes should tell the whole story. Chicago Tribune, Retrieved from http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/gun-foes-should-tell-whole-story?print

Kopel, D. B. (2000, Jan 10). The facts about gun shows. CATO Institute, Retrieved from http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/facts-about-gun-shows?print 

Lampo, D. (2000, May 13). Gun control: myths and realities. CATO Institute, Retrieved from http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/gun-control-myths-realities

Levy, R. A. (2011, Jan 19). Gun control measures don't stop violence. CNN, Retrieved from http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/gun-control-measures-dont-stop-violence

Levy, R. A. (2005, June 28). Oversight hearing on the district of Columbia's gun control laws. CATO Institute, Retrieved from http://www.cato.org/publications/congressional-testimony/oversight-hearing-district-columbias-gun-control-laws?print

Lott, J. R. (1998). More guns, less crime: understanding crime and gun control laws. (3rd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

McGinty, E. E., Webster, D. W., & Barry, C. L. (2013). Effects of news media messages about mass shooting on attitudes toward person with serious mental illness and public support for gun control policies. The American journal of psychiatry , Retrieved from http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleID=1669752

Stein, K. F. (2013). An unanticipated journey: barriers to effective gun control in the united states. Journal of the American psychiatric nurses association, 19(1), Retrieved from http://jap.sagepub.com/content/19/1/8.short

Wodarz, D., & Komarova, N. L. (2013). Calculating effective gun policies. Cornell university library, Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.7332

Zimring, F. (1968). Is gun control likely to reduce violent killings?. The university of chicago law review, 35(4), Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1598883?uid=2&uid=4&sid=21102201663257