Stricter Gun Control Research

Gun control is a very controversial topic that has has a huge impact on the United States of America. One side believes that if guns were taken away as a whole, the country would see significantly less gun related crimes and death, while the other opposing side thinks that taking away guns is not only against the Second Amendment but would lead to an increase in crime and death because the government would take guns away from people who are legally registered to own and conceal guns. The ongoing debate will continue until the foreseeable future but their are plenty of reasons why more gun laws should be made. Taking away guns is not the answer, learning how to deal with gun violence is the key.

We had to admit it is true somehow, too many mass shooting happened, the data from FBI uniform crime reports shows that more than half of total numbers of murder victims by weapon form 2008 to 2012 were caused by firearms, especially by guns1. This is one of the main reason why is there so many pro-gun control activist. They firmly believe that gun control would worked very well because it worked at other countries. But I have example contradict that opinion, one of example is Britain, in Britain, it seems impossible for citizens to get a firearm easily. So does it mean gun control successes? We need some statistic to prove this, according to the statistics of murder and homicide rates before and after gun bans, “After the ban, clearly homicide rates bounce around over time, but there is only one year where the homicide rate is lower than it was in 1996. The homicide rate only began falling when there was a large increase in the number of police officers during 2003 and 2004. Despite the huge increase in the number of police, the murder rate still remained slightly higher than the immediate pre-ban rate2.” This data definitely overthrows what the gun control activist expected, particularly the murder rate are even higher than before gun banned. In the table of the Harvard study report, the data clearly shows that Finland have highest ownership in the country listed, but there is only 0.87% of murder rate with guns3. This proved once again that guns are just

Gun control activists have a tendency to use the mantra that more guns means more deaths. Gun control activists will also point out to the U.S. murder rate and compare it to England’s as further proof. However, the mantra that more guns means more death has been proven to be patently false when compared to multiple European countries, where there is no direct correlation between gun ownership and murder rate (Kates & Mauser, n.d., p652). Furthermore, Kates & Mauser (n.d., p653) went on to show that there is actually a negative correlation between firearm concentration and violent crimes. Ehrenfreund & Godlfarb (2015) referenced a study conducted in 2011 by an economist named Richard Florida, using a graphic he made created showing states with tighter gun laws had fewer gun related deaths per capita. This has also been refuted by the research of Kates & Mauser where it was

For many years now, citizens of the United States of America have questioned if restricting the right for Law abiding Americans to own guns will decrease crime, murder, and violence, benefiting the county as a whole. However, there are many logical, and factual reasons as to why doing so may not be beneficial to the people of the great, free nation at all. Guns are a huge part of this extravagant nations creation and history, as without firearms, America may not have ever gained its independence from Great Britain. Violence is at a high in the United States, with and without the use of firearms, and Washington’s politicians are only striving on

Most homicides in the United States are committed with firearms. Approximately 270 firearms are owned by Americans scales to about 90 guns for every 100 people. Annually, the misuse of these firearms cost thousands of lives. Stricter gun control is a step into putting a halt to mass shootings. Not only should gun control keep being enacted, but the process to obtaining a gun should be stricter because it would be an immense effort to keep gun violence down and effectively save more lives.

As we engulf ourselves in politics for the election year, there has been frequent source of debate between the candidates; gun control. In the words of Patrick J. Charles of Britannica, gun control is “…politics, legislation,and enforcement of measures intended to restrict access to, the possession of, or the use of arms, specifically firearms.” Even taking away the political importance, gun control is a hot topic that is in every Americans mind as fear for personal safety is on the rise. This has been created by increased media attention and coverage of mass shootings, which seem to occur more frequently as time goes on. This has lead to the question: can we use laws and enforcement to reduce the violence? It shows creating laws to control or ban the purchasing and use of firearms is the most probable to be the solution to reducing gun violence while coinciding with proper firearm education.

and has one of the lowest homicide rates (Masters). Along with Norway, Finland, Germany, and France have high ownership rates but have low crime rates. In contrast with these countries, Luxembourg has a complete ban on handguns but has nine times the crime rate. The Harvard study concluded that crime rates are directly related to “social, economic, and cultural factors.” Furthermore, they came to the conclusion that guns don't kill people, people kill people. Russia enforces considerably strict gun control laws, but with these laws, Russia has four times the crime rate of the United States. The study proved that when guns are restricted, other means are used in the murders (Mcquain). While some claim that the US is an outlier on gun control,

Over the years, a great amount of effort and money has been spent on legislation regarding gun control. Gun control advocates maintained that increased gun control could reduce the soaring crime rates found in cities across America. However, most of the arguments used for gun control are the result of careful manipulation of data and emotional appeal. These “myths” are twisted by our liberal media until they are seen as the truth. However, despite the claims of gun control activists, gun control does not reduce crime, it only leaves law abiding citizens increasingly vulnerable to violent crime.

Gun control in the United States is needed. There are 88 guns for every 100 people living in the United States not even counting the illegal weapons in American citizens homes. Proponents of gun control generally argue that widespread gun ownership increases the danger of homicide and suicide. Over 100,000 people are shot each year in the U.S.and 72% of all violent killings use guns as the weapon. Last year, handguns killed 48 people in Japan, 8 people in Great Britain, 34 people in Switzerland, 52 people in Canada, 58 people in Israel, 21 people in Sweden, 42 people in West Germany and 10,728 people in the United States. All of these countries besides the United States have gun control.

While in the United States there is less than a 1/250 chance of being the victim of a violent crime, including one where a firearm is used. This means that even though a civilian is more likely to be harmed by a gun in the United States, he is still less likely to be a victim of a violent crime, including murder, than a civilian in Britain or Wales. However, most of those who support an increase in gun control choose to focus on the fact that there is a 1/10,000 chance of being part of a violent crime involving a gun in the UK(Violent Crime 2). In addition to that, if one were to remove the top five cities with the highest crime rate in the United States such as Detroit, New York City, and New Orleans, coincidentally the cities with the strictest gun control, the United States’ crime rates, and gun-related murders drop, dramatically(Doeden 31). Although Australia is often referred to as an example of a country that banned guns, statistics show that violent crimes were already declining in Australia when the mandatory gun buyback was enforced from 1996 to 2003, and there is no way to prove that Australia’s decrease in crime had anything to with the mandatory gun

One big fact everyone looks at is how the countries such as Britain, England, Ireland, and Jamaica have stricter gun laws, and how the gun crime has dropped (“Murder and Homicide Rates before and after Gun Bans.”). What they overlook is how the crime

Gary Mauser professor in Simon Fraser university in Canada, argues that the gun-laws does not reduce the crime rate, because in previous decades there have been only 22 states allowing gun bearing, later 37 more created flexible laws for gun possession and surprisingly the violence rates in to 2004 dropped drastically, also it is even more surprising that US compared to other states in the world have an impressive drop in crime rate (Mauser, 2004). Also there are facts from the state’s such UK and Canada which enforced gun-laws, that the crime rate increased after the laws were passed. Moreover Mark Moore and Anthony Braga (2000) argue that even if most clear empirical statistics are provided which show that gun bearing is harmful, most of the people who own a gun are not going to obey. Also guns in US are hold primarily for self-protection, so despite the statistics that 11% in 100.000 Americans committed suicide and homicide, the surprising effect is that estimated 100.000 Americans per year are using guns in property loss protection. According to Mark Guertz (1995) guns have been used most of the time for self-defense rather than violating crimes. Currently a survey conducted in 2011 resulted that “49% of Americans support the gun rights, whereas 45% say that guns have to be controlled” (The Pew Research Center, 2012) this tight percentage where the majority thinks that US citizens have to be provided with gun rights, is a strong evidence describing that

Further, despite the fact that gun ownership in the U.S. increased enormously during the 1990’s, there was a consistent, dramatic reduction of criminal violence. In fact, homicide and violent crime have plunged over the last 15 years. Considering that 18 of 25 countries surveyed had an increase of violent crime, America’s large decline is impressive. Moreover, Norway, Finland, Germany, France, and Denmark also have a high rate of private gun ownership, and the murder rates in these countries are as low as or lower than developed nations with less gun ownership (Kates & Mauser, 2007).

For example, women who behave passively when confronted by a criminal are 2.5 times as likely to end up being seriously injured as women who have a gun. And men who behave passively are 1.4 times as likely to be seriously injured as men who have a gun. Not only do the states with the highest gun ownership rates have much lower crime rates, but, more importantly, those states that have had the largest increases in gun ownership over time have had the biggest relative drops in violent crime. A similar relationship exists across countries. Usually only six or so countries are compared, but, as Jeff Miron at Boston University and others have shown, when data is used for all countries from which it is available, the countries with the strictest gun-control laws tend to have the highest homicide

The argument of firearm regulation has been a heated discussion for many years especially with rise of deadly massacres brought to light in our nation. On one side of the debate, we have people in favor placing restrictions on guns, while, on the opposite end of the spectrum, we have people fighting the regulation and prohibitions of guns. People in favor of gun restrictions believe gun control can or may reduce crime, while the people against gun control believe having the right to bear arms is an effective crime deterrent. The implementation of gun control in the United states is a large problem as it will take away the 2nd Amendment rights and would also stop the ability of law abiding citizens to protect themselves from criminals who obtain guns illegally. The right to bear arms is promised to citizens of the United States, and to put gun control into effect is to take away their Constitutional rights. Crime is very high in cities that have few gun control laws. However, the problem will not be solved by taking guns away from people who are registered and licensed to carry them.