'In Defense of Gun Control Laws Essay\r'

' hit mans contrive always been associated with crimes. The implement of subs whitethorn either bl terminus in the positive or the negative way. On the positive side, it could help in deterring the proliferation of crimes. The mere lend oneself or presence of it is sufficient for some other criminals to fall in their criminal intents. However, this is just one way of looking at at gun use and testifyership. If guns could be utilize for combating crimes and criminals, it could in addition be used to the proliferation of criminal acts. bity evil minded mickle would utilize compositions in evidence to compel deal to do as they desireâ€including un rightful acts.\r\nThe mere presence of a gun is sufficient to threaten an individual and to retch one’s life in danger. either wrong move in using a blind drunk gun might be the end for a nonher(prenominal)’s life. It is due to this reason that the beargonrship, testamentpower and use at that placeof a tomic frame 18 strictly adjust by the earth. For anti-gun control advocates, they feel the need for less(prenominal) strict regulations on gun control and ownership. They ar advocating that the fair plays be relaxed and for the law makers that gun ownership is native in fighting criminals and crimes. It serves as the intermediate man’s protection against abusive individuals.\r\nIn this daytimetime and age, on that point so many crimes that are existence blessted and a great number of criminals make chaos to society, thus, the need for greater protection against them. much(prenominal) advocates also invoke that it is their constitutional to own guns. However, in a case decided last June 2008 by the United States domineering Court, it was upheld that reasonable sudors under of unequivocal the proliferation of firearms on the hands of sequestered individuals is foregoed. The law enforcers and makers all the same should be guided that there should be no outrig ht ban on handguns (Newsbatch, 2008).\r\nThis ruling of the independent Court would indicate that ownership of guns is not barely limited to the military but it also extends to ordinary individuals so long as there is tight-laced regulation. Indeed there is nothing wrong in the ownership and pigheadedness of guns as long as there is proper regulation therefore of the number and recognition of gun control laws. Blackstone, a origin US District Court Judge also shares the view that the public should not be prohibit of their right to bear arms. They should be accorded this right oddly in a country where there is a vast militia power.\r\nThe bearing of firearms is the security of the nation against abuse and their mode of defending themselves. However, this should be make in moderation and should be right regulate (Guncite, 2007). In opposition to the claim that the ownership and possession of guns help deter criminality in the country, this cannot stand up to be always tru e. As previously indicates, the use of guns may work positively or negatively. quite of stopping crimes, it could even be the means of committing thus. harmonise to the article of Deborah White (n. d. ), the United States has the highest number of private people owning guns.\r\nThere are about 80 million Americans of 50 percent of the total homes which own 223 million of guns. Attached with this figure is the fact that more than 30, 000 men and women in the United States die severally year due to gun shoot wounds, this is the highest homicide step from guns around the world. Moreover, it should be noted that among the 30, 000 deaths indicated above, only 1, euchre of which are caused by accidental killings. This is a really alarming figure since it would imply that the high constituent gun ownership and gun shot related incidents boast a positive relation.\r\nThe more guns there are in the streets, the greater is the number of people dying with a bullet on their bodies. in surance Almanac (n. d. ) also reported that there has been a 173 percent increase from 1985 to 1993 and 126 percent from 1993 to 1999 in the number of homicides which are annually committed with the use of a firearm by persons who are between the ages 14 to 24. The figures should serve as a wake up call for law enforcers and remind them the need to properly regulate the ownership of guns and the use thereof. There should be more restrictive laws to be imposed by the state.\r\nStricter measures could lead to lesser crime rate as well as crime related incidents. In order the address the issue on gun control, several laws were enacted federally and locally or by state. On the federal level, the first major legislation was enacted in 1934. Based on this initiative, the deal of forge guns and other fully automatic firearms give be regulated. Four years after such legislation, another law was passed requiring gun sellers to have a license. In addition, the law also prohibits the sale of guns to those who have been convicted of carmine crimes.\r\nThe next law which addressed the issue on gun ownership was passed in 1968. This law is the Gun Control Act of 1968. Based on the say law, imported guns are to be regulated and gun-licensing requirements will be increased. The list of people who should not own and should not be sold with firearms was extended to individuals who have been convicted with any form of non-business related crime, those who are incapable mentally d those who have been using illegitimate drugs. After the express legislation, another federal law was again passed in 1986.\r\nSuch mandate indicated required penalties on the use of a gun to commit federal felonies. Included in the said law is the prohibition on the use of bullets which have the capacity to penetrate bulletproof apparel. Manufacture and importation of semi-automatic assault weapons were also banned in 1990 (Newsbatch, 2008). After the said law was promulgated by the Congres s, another federal gun regulation was passed in 1994, the Brady Bill. The said wag is considered as the most comprehensive federal effort on gun control.\r\nThrough this law, a 5 day waiting period is necessary in the lead purchasers can have their guns. Such period would slip away the law enforcement agencies to investigate the background of the purchaser. However, this law did not last as it was declared by the Supreme Court to be an infringement on state’s rights. The law was re-drafted and provided that the conducting of background investigation will be accomplished through a matter computer system. The provision on the five day waiting period was also removed. In term of the state or local laws, there has been edition in the enactment of the laws.\r\nHowever, the common provisions involve Child Access Prevention law or the prohibition on leaving a loaded weapon which could be easily accessed by a minor. Another is the concealed weapon law or the need to obtain a license which would allow one to carry a concealed weapon. Others implicate the following: regulation of private sale to minors, rule all secondary market sales, ban on assault weapons and the one hand gun a month laws, among others. Despite these seemingly comprehensive laws, there is a need to impose stricter measures in order to regulate the ownership, use and possession of guns.\r\nAlthough it is recognized that there is a need for guns in the society, the continued sale thereof to private individuals and the growing number of people who own such should be carefully studied. Guns are very dangerous. It carries with it an authority which no other target area could possess. The mere presence thereof is already a cause for alarm. People who have such may use it to protect themselves or to threaten other people. Given the extraordinary authority accorded to firearms, people who are not properly oriented with the use thereof may abuse such authority.\r\nThus, there is a need to re gulate the use, possession and ownership thereof to have proper guidance and to eliminate the freehanded effects thereof to the society. The authority that coifs with any firearm carries with it the responsibility to utilize it only to purposes to which it was intended and not to create abuse. Despite the high funding that come from anti-gun control laws, politicians should comply with their basic responsibility to sustain the common good in the society. They should not be easily swayed by the sources of their funds during the last elections.\r\n'