Guns In America
Today in America, gun control is a very serious issue. There are
different
opinions on this issue, the National Rifle Association (NRA), feels
that guns
are safe when used for protection by responsible citizens, others
feel that guns
are far to dangerous to be kept in homes, and that guns should
not be owned by
anyone, only used by the National Guard and law enforcement.
These people think
their opinions are correct according to the second
amendment, the amendment that
deals with the bearing of arms by citizens of
America, but there have been
different interpretations of it. The reason that
people feel gun ownership is
such a problem is that so many people lose their
lives by them each year.
Personally, I feel that guns lead to increases
in crime, murder, and household
accidents. By reducing availability of guns
and providing education on gun
safety, I think that these things will help
make America safer. Before making up
my mind on what I felt about the issue,
I made sure to consider the opinions of
others and to collect statistics.
People from the (NRA), who are against gun
control, feel that the people are
responsible for the negative effects guns have
on America. Helen Smith, a
forensic psychologist who shares the ideas of the
NRA, wrote an article
titled "It’s Not The Guns". In this article, she
talks about the increase in
school and youth violence, relating to guns. She
blames the children and
irresponsible parents. She denies that guns are easier
for kids to get today
which is understandable because many people keep their
guns locked up. Dr.
Gary Kleck, a criminologist at Florida State University,
defends guns in gun
related accidents. He conducted a survey, which showed that
there are fewer
gun related accidents than there are automobile accidents,
falls, drowning,
pedestrian, fire, poisoning, and suffocation. As a result of
his survey, he
said "Subsequently politicians demand mandatory safety classes
for all gun
owners, yet many more lives could be saved by randomly selecting
and
educating a group of drivers rather than gun owners, not to mention the
populace
at large regarding, administering first-aid, how to eat, and basic
common sense
safety habits." Although these people do have good points, I
cannot say that I
agree with everything they state. For one thing, it is true
that the people are
responsible for how they use guns but not true to say
that guns are not part of
the problem. You cannot just get rid of people who
are incapable of knowing how
to treat guns correctly, but you can take away
guns, so that these problems and
accidents will not occur at all. In response
to Dr. Kleck’s survey, I would
like to say that although firearms may not be
the largest cause of accidents per
year, but they do cause too many needless
deaths, so something should be done
about them. Nine hundred deaths a year
may not seem like a lot of deaths to some
people, but I assume it would if
their child or someone they knew were one of
those people. That is what
everyone needs to consider. Regarding the fact that
Dr. Kleck thinks that
more lives would be saved by giving random drivers safety
lessons and teach
the average citizen common sense, I’d have to say that
common sense does not
have much to do with the accidents on his survey. I am
sure he has tripped
and fallen or choked on his food before at least once. I
have, does that mean
I lack common sense? I also disagree with some of the
points Helen Smith made
in her article. I do think she is right that the
children who would use guns
on fellow students have mental issues that separate
them from the average
child. But, again saying that guns are not part of that problem is something I
would beg to differ. If the Columbine students did not
have access to assault
weapons such as a Tech 9 and a shotgun, I doubt the
outcome would have been
the same. Because these two students had these guns,
several other students
were killed for no reason. Knowing this, how can someone
say, "It’s not the
guns"? Hearing the opinions of people that differ from
mine bring many
different questions to mind, such as why do we need guns in the
first place
other than in the National Guard and law enforcement? The answer is
to
protect ourselves, but from what? Well, other people who have guns. It’s
a
chain reaction. Someone sees other people buying guns and decides that they
also
need one because so many others have them. This being the case, I can
see people
buying handguns to keep their families safe from a dangerous
neighborhood. I can
also see people buying hunting rifles for hunting
purposes obviously, but I
wonder, why assault weapons? Do some people buy
these high-powered shotguns and
machine guns with seemingly endless clips to
hunt? I doubt it. These guns were
designed specifically to kill. Why are
these weapons sold to the average law
abiding citizen? This is the thing that
bothers me the most. We now have a
standing army, unlike when there were only
state militias. The second amendment
was written to allow these militiamen to
own weapons. The second amendment is
now interpreted different ways, which
creates a great deal of controversy. The
second amendment states "A well
regulated Militia, being necessary to the
security of a free state, the right
of the people to bear arms, shall not be
infringed." People have taken this
to mean that in addition to having a
militia, citizens of America have the
Constitutional right to bear arms. Others
think that seeing how we now have a
standing army, not a militia, there is no
need for average citizens to bear
arms, so it is no longer their Constitutional
right. There have even been
Supreme Court cases to determine what the amendment
means. The U.S. v.
Cruikshank case of 1876, the first case involving the second
amendment,
decided that the right for Americans to bear arms was not protected
by the
second amendment, but it was not denied by the amendment either.
The
Supreme Court upheld the decision of the U.S. v. Cruikshank case in
other cases
that were brought to it. Even if people have the right to bear
arms, whether it
is constitutional or not, statistics should turn people away
from owning a gun.
The Chicago Police Department Murder Analysis shows an
increase in murder rates
every year by firearms. In 1998, 65% of murders were
by firearms, 52% of those
by handguns. 25% of the murderers did not have a
criminal record, which shows
that new gun owners are using guns for more than
just protection. In 1995, there
were 13,790 firearm homicides. I’m not sure
what these numbers mean to others,
but to me they seem very large. I’m sure
that almost all of these people who
were victims of guns, should not have
lost their lives. My goal in this essay is
to allow everyone to see and
understand why gun control is necessary to lower
the rates of crime, murder,
and household accidents, which are much too high.
People are losing their
lives by firearms everyday, and I feel that is time for
that to stop. In this
essay, you have the opportunity to see both sides of the
argument and choose
who you agree with or form your own opinion. Hopefully, by
providing you with
statistics and background information as well as opinion, you
were able to
understand why I feel the way I do about this topic and understand
why it is
so important to control the spread of guns throughout America.