Gun Control Laws in the United States

Introduction

It is a well-known fact that gun violence is one of the main causes of death among young people. For this reason, reducing the number of crimes is one of the urgent problems faced by the United States (Harriot). Recurring mass executions have changed the vector of public opinion in the direction towards tightening control over the trade and possession of guns in the country. The purpose of this paper is to discuss arguments against the enactment of more gun control laws.

We will write a custom Gun Control Laws in the United States specifically for you
for only $14.00 $11,90/page
308 certified writers online
Learn More

Discussion

The right of Americans to bear guns consolidated at the constitutional level is interpreted differently in different states, the laws of which, in their turn, are based on national, social, legal, and historical aspects. Moreover, in some cases, the difference in positions may also be observed within the states due to the fact that municipal authorities regulate the right to own weapons (“Should More Gun Control Laws Be Enacted”). It is impossible to state that this right is universal since it is recorded in the US Constitution but not in enough detail.

The essence of this problem lies in the fact that it goes beyond the discussion of the right to own weapons and is part of a larger systemic issue related to the structure of the state. The author of this essay considers that the debate between liberals and conservatives regarding the Second Amendment and methods of combating crime is ineffective. Importantly, the core of the issue is not connected to the fact that the amendment guarantees certain population rights (DeGrazia and Hunt 57). If the possession and carrying of weapons by citizens prevent crimes and save lives, then an appropriate law may be adopted at any time.

The country’s experience in the fight against crime suggests that tougher penalties for violations rarely deter people from committing illegal action. On the one hand, the removal of weapons from the hands of criminals is an effective propaganda slogan. On the other hand, severe restrictions or legal prohibition against possessing a gun will only increase the possibility of illegal access to it. The country’s experience has shown that a ban on the sale of goods that are in high demand leads to the flourishing of the black market (DeGrazia and Hunt 71). The main evidence of this is the Prohibition era or the ban to sell drugs. The black market of weapons is thriving and growing, and restricting the right to purchase weapons will only worsen the situation. It may be assumed that it is impossible to take away weapons from criminals; therefore, it is necessary to try other methods of resolving the issue.

Further Points

It should be stressed that the problem should be addressed from a psychological perspective and focus on preventive measures. Concealed carry has a strong psychological effect not only on those who want to protect themselves but also on potential criminals. A number of studies have shown that criminals may reject an idea to commit an attack if they fear that their potential victim is armed (DeGrazia and Hunt 213). As it follows from the discussion above, measures that limit the carrying of weapons are effective only against the law-abiding part of the population. Such laws create a safe environment for criminals since they leave law-abiding citizens defenseless. The possibility of self-defense with the use of a gun from the side of the victim will have a stronger deterrent effect on the offender than the fear of being punished by law.

In addition, preventive measures may further assist in the fight against crime. Checking suspicious individuals and monitoring the activities of violators will allow controlling the potential criminals (DeGrazia and Hunt 101). Such a measure may be regarded as a violation of personal freedom; however, it is necessary to comprehend that the life and health of people is the main priority in any situation. Moreover, educational institutions should raise the issue of liability systematically. Possession of a gun implies a high degree of responsibility, and those who use their gun carelessly should be punished strictly.

Conclusion

Thus, it can be concluded that arguments for the enactment of gun control laws are somewhat not objective. Although laws guarantee specific freedoms, they are not effective enough. People should be able to protect themselves when the situation requires so. It the task of authorities and the US government to allow people to defend themselves, and they should place a particular emphasis on the responsible use of guns while controlling the potential violators through preventive measures.

Get your
100% original paper on any topic done
in as little as 3 hours
Learn More

Works Cited

DeGrazia, David, and Lester H. Hunt. Debating Gun Control: How Much Regulation Do We Need? Oxford University Press, 2016.

Harriot, Michael. “Every Argument against Commonsense Gun Control Broken Down to Its Idiotic Nonsense.” The Root. 2017, Web.

“Should More Gun Control Laws Be Enacted?” ProCon.org. 2019, Web.

Check the price of your paper