Introduction
Public safety concerns are the primary reason for establishing stringent controls on the selling and use of guns. The rates of homicide and public killings drive the agenda of making guns unavailable, more so to those inclined towards violence. The ultimate aim is to reduce crime in society and save lives. However, some people have a contrary opinion. Some of the rationales for allowing the public to access guns is to ensure that law-abiding citizens can have the capacity for self-defense. Moreover, it may be futile for a society already saturated with guns to prevent criminals from accessing guns.
The other argument is that guns are merely instruments lawbreakers use, not what drives their intentions. The other point of contention in the gun war is its effect on the relationship between an individual, society, and the state. Although guns are perceived as necessary tools for self-defense, the facts on mass shooting, homicides, inequalities of victims of such violence, and the demand for justice calls for an amendment to gun ownership a liability.
Background on Gun Control
Gun control remains one of the most pressing public health issues that has spurred debate for decades with no amicable resolution. The debate has been ongoing for more than 50 years and, in recent years, has primarily focused on the statistics on mass shootings, homicides, and suicides (Rood, 2017). Noteworthy, there were 1.5 million firearm deaths between 1968 and 2017 (“Mass shootings’, 2022). Moreover, there has been a 43% increase in gun-related deaths from 2010 to 2020 with about 45,000 killings in 2020 (“Mass shootings’, 2022). The high availability of guns in the United States is directly related to the increase of violent crimes (Stansfield & Semenza, 2019).
Yet, findings indicate that United States has a ratio of 120.5 firearms per 100 people (“Mass shootings’, 2022). Thus, gun laws have the potential to minimize suicide incidences by reducing ownership, keeping guns away from dangerous individuals, and influencing gun usage.
Conversely, the group of people that think it is vital for all citizens to have the liberty of owning a gun cite the Second Amendment of the constitution. Historically, the changes were made immediately after the independence to protect the 13 states on the Atlantic coast surrounded by hostile foreign authorities (Miller, 2018). The people were given guns to have a sense of protection against their perpetrators and to continue fighting to retain their independence. Therefore, the supporters of gun access argue that people should retain their rights to self-protection as in 1787 (Miller, 2018). The problem with the argument is that the context of the contemporary United States is significantly different from the post-independence period.
Gun Access and Crime
Ease access and ownership of guns increase the probability of violent crimes. Several studies show that the availability of firearms positively correlates with homicide, suicide, and accidental death among children (Stansfield & Semenza, 2019). Similarly, a recent study reveals that a 10-unit increase in state gun permissiveness results in an 11.5% (95% confidence interval 4.2% to 19.3%, P=0.002) increase in a mass shooting (Repping et al., 2019). The implication is that permitting gun access, even when licensed, directly correlates with the increase in crimes. Therefore, it is vital to implement gun control laws that will restrict the ownership of guns by civilians.
Research findings indicate that an increase in gun ownership causes an increase in the number of casualties by murder or suicide. Most murders are committed using firearms than any other weapons, such as knives, in countries where there is no gun control (Johnson et al., 2021). Notably, from 1991 to 2016, 11.4 people lost their lives in every 100,000 due to firearms in homicide-related cases (Siegel et at., 2019). The chances of death are further escalated when there is poor storage culture, access by a gun caliber, and a societal culture characterized by high gun violence (Stansfield & Semenza, 2019). Thus, when people are denied access to guns, they will not have lethal weapons to commit murder or suicide when wronged.
Gun Access and Inequalities
The victims and casualties of gun violence are likely vulnerable populations such as minors and women. Notably, 98% of intimate partner homicides are perpetrated by men against women (Stansfield & Semenza, 2019). Moreover, 50% of such killings are done using guns, which shows disparity in both access and use of guns (Stansfield & Semenza, 2019). The government and human rights activists have a legal and moral obligation to protect those that are innocent in society. One way of achieving this goal is ensuring that perpetrators do not have easy access to guns.
In addition, mass shootings and other criminal activities involving the use of guns appear to affect the blacks and other non-Caucasians more than it does other communities. For instance, the city with the highest rate of homicide is St.Luis (has 46% African Americans), at 64% cases of non-negligent manslaughter or murder (McMillan & Bernstein, 2021). Similarly, the rate of gun related homicide is high in Baltimore city at 58.3%, which has 62.5% blacks, whereas, in Stockton, where the rate of firearm homicide is 10.9%, the percentage of blacks is 11.8 (McMillan & Bernstein, 2021). These findings indicate that some minority ethnic communities are unfairly targeted in gun violence hence the need for statutory interventions.
Gun Violence and Injustice
The victims of gun violence have been at the forefront of campaigning for legal control, and it is time to grant them the justice that they so crave. For instance, on December 14, 2012, there was a mass shooting at Sandy Elementary school (Rood, 2017). President Barrack Obama and other activists rightly used the incident to campaign against unrestricted access to guns (Reeping et al., 2019). The parents and relatives of the children who were killed have to live through the fear that people can still access guns and the atrocity can be repeated. Therefore, the only way to be fair to the casualties and victims of the mass shooting is to implement gun control measures.
People tend to use guns more when perpetrating violence as compared to other weapons. For instance, of all homicides reported in the United States, 50% are done using guns (Stansfield & Semenza, 2019). The implication is that allowing reckless gun ownership is a way of putting the life of the public at risk. It is ironic to keep solving murder cases in the courts when the root cause is the easy access of guns. True justice is eminent when the government ensures that committing crimes becomes more difficult for the perpetrators.
Objections to Gun Control
The Second Amendment, which offered citizens a right of self-defense, is often cited by many defenders of gun access. This law was established when the people were facing the threat of possible colonization and slavery from the foreign nations (Miller, 2018). The guns empower people for self-protection whenever they are faced with a threat. Establishing gun control is a violation of the law and risks the lives of people. Therefore, as a way of maintaining the integrity of the constitution, it is vital for all people to have the right to own a firearm.
There are many uses for guns, including hunting, killing of rodents and pests, sporting, and entertainment. Only a few people use guns for criminal purposes, as most owners do not intend to harm other people. Noteworthy, for many people living in rural areas, guns are a common part of their daily activities. People use guns to protect against wild animals and for gaming. Therefore, any sanctions against guns are likely to directly affect people with pure intentions.
Given that guns are so many in the United States, it is impossible to make gun control effective. For instance, in 2017, more than 135 000 federally licensed firearm manufacturers and dealers were in the United States (Stansfield & Semenza, 2019). People already have established ways and systems of owning firearms. Even if the government tries to restrict ownership and licensure, it will be impossible to eliminate the system comprising gun manufacturers and dealers.
Response to Counter Arguments
People think that gun control is a violation of the second amendment and that it takes away the ability of people to defend themselves. However, they fail to recognize the fact that they cannot compare the modern world with the post-colonial period (Miller, 2018). The reports on firearm accidental and intentional injuries from civilians are high (Betz et al., 2021). The United States has a well-established legal and judicial system that can handle internal and external threats. Therefore, there is no need to carry a weapon for protection as the police and the army have guns that can protect all citizens.
Moreover, there are other sporting and recreational activities that people can engage in without putting the lives of others at risk. For example, the animals can be hunted using bows and arrows, which is effective in sports. Notably, youth activists and survivors of mass shootings in the United States are demanding more stringent gun control (Van Sparrentak et al., 2018). Ending gun violence will not happen at once. However, it is better to start making small changes that will cumulatively have a positive change.
In conclusion, evidence shows that the lack of gun restriction has caused public health crisis, with cases of mass shootings, suicide, homicides, and accidental injuries on the increase. The victims of gun violence are likely to be a part of the minority communities, such as women and children. Moreover, there is an urgent call for justice by the survivors of such violence. The right of self-defense should only be enjoyed if it does not pose a risk to other people. Moreover, there are several alternatives to guns for recreation and protection. Therefore, as much as gun control requires constitutional amends and other changes, it is time to make the necessary changes.
References
Betz, M. E., Harkavy-Friedman, J., Dreier, F. L., Pincus, R., & Ranney, M. L. (2021). Talking about “Firearm injury” and “Gun violence”: Words matter. American Journal of Public Health, 111(12), 2105-2110. Web.
Johnson, B. T., Sisti, A., Bernstein, M., Chen, K., Hennessy, E. A., Acabchuk, R. L., & Matos, M. (2021). Community-level factors and incidence of gun violence in the United States, 2014–2017. Social Science & Medicine, 280(9), 1-39. Web.
Mass shootings: America’s challenge for gun control explained in seven charts. (2017). BBC News. Web.
McMillan, J., & Bernstein, M. (2021). Beyond gun control: Mapping gun violence prevention logics. Sociological Perspectives, 65(1), 177-195. Web.
Miller, S. V. (2018). What Americans think about gun control: Evidence from the general social survey, 1972-2016. Social Science Quarterly, 100(1), 272-288. Web.
Reeping, P. M., Cerdá, M., Kalesan, B., Wiebe, D. J., Galea, S., & Branas, C. C. (2019). State gun laws, gun ownership, and mass shootings in the US: Cross sectional time series. BMJ, 1(1), 1-6. Web.
Rood, C. (2017). “Our tears are not enough”: The warrant of the dead in the rhetoric of gun control. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 104(1), 47-70. Web.
Siegel, M., Pahn, M., Xuan, Z., Fleegler, E., & Hemenway, D. (2019). The impact of state firearm laws on homicide and suicide deaths in the USA, 1991–2016: A panel study. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 34(10), 2021-2028. Web.
Stansfield, R., & Semenza, D. (2019). Licensed firearm dealer availability and intimate partner homicide: A multilevel analysis in sixteen states. Preventive Medicine, 126, 1-5. Web.
Van Sparrentak, M., Chang, T., Miller, A. L., Nichols, L. P., & Sonneville, K. R. (2018). Youth opinions about guns and gun control in the United States. JAMA Pediatrics, 172(9), 884. Web.