РефератыИностранный языкGuGun Control Sucks Essay Research Paper Whenever

Gun Control Sucks Essay Research Paper Whenever

Gun Control Sucks Essay, Research Paper


Whenever some terrible act of violence occurs such as the


horrible Columbine Shooting, people start looking for answers and


pointing fingers. They want to put the blame on something


saying, ?It was the parents fault,? or, ?It is television and the


Internet?s fault,? but the blame is most often put on an


inanimate object that does only what the person operating it


tells it to do. The Gun. In the next few minutes one should


realize that it is not the gun?s fault and more gun control laws


are not the answer. Gun control violates rights given to us by


the Second Amendment, guns have proven to be extremely effective


in deterring crimes and protecting private property, gun control


does not work in controlling violence, and gun control goes


against everything the founders of this country stood for.


Gun control violates the rights that the founders of this


country shed their blood for. Our constitution is the rights


that the framers of this country put together because they felt


it to be necessary for a strong nation. In it the Second


Amendment states, ?A well regulated Militia, being necessary to


the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and


bear arms shall not be infringed. One would think that the men


who wrote the Constitution knew and understood the importance of


allowing a free people to have the right to keep and bear arms.


Some would say that today?s well regulated militia was the


National Guard, but even if that was true the Second Amendment


still protects individuals rights to keep and bear arms. As


Thomas Jefferson so emphatically put it, ?No free man should ever


be disbarred the use of arms.? (Quotations 1) Thomas Jefferson,


being a huge supporter of the right to bear arms, also said, ?The


beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed


until they try to take it.? Jefferson also said, ?The strongest


reason for the People to retain the Right to Keep and Bear Arms


is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in


government.? He definitely realized, as did the other writers of


the constitution, the importance of letting a free people have


the right to Bear Arms.


It has been said that guns just cause violence and are never


a benefit to society, nothing could be so far from the truth.


Statistics have shown time and time again that guns are used


hundreds of thousands of times a year in the defense of one?s


self, property, and family. In fact, according to Dr. Kleck, a


criminologist at Florida State University, 75% of all uses of


guns in crime related incidents are defensive uses by would be


crime victims. (Lee 2) That is a huge percentage. That turns out


to be more than 2 million times a year that citizens use lawfully


owned firearms to defend themselves and their families. Studies


have even been done by anti-gun groups that prove the same fact.


One anti-gun survey said that handguns were used in defending


more than 645,000 crimes per year. (Kates 12) All of this and


more disproves the notion that guns are one of society?s evils


and need to be rid of completely.


Without citizen gun ownership their would be more violent


felons on the street. The FBI has collected data that shows that


armed citizens lawfully kill more violent felons per year than do


the police. (Kates 1) When one says they want more gun control


they do not fully realize what they are saying. Gun control will


not be a benefit to society but rather a downfall.


Past and present citizens with guns have always had a


positive affect in society. In fact, going back a hundred years


to the Wild West if one would look into it, contrary to what


books and movies of the old west portray, violence was far less


prevalent than it is today. Contrary to myths, bank and stage


coach robberies were few. Would be criminals knew with certainty


that if they would try to rob a bank the tellers and managers


would have firearms and would be able and willing to protect


themselves. (Lee 6) The young, the old, and the female—those


most vulnerable–were far safer in the most wild and woolly


frontier towns than they are in any American city today. People


had arms, knew how to use them, and were willing to fight with


deadly force to protect their persons and property. (Lee 6)


A good example of how citizens with lawfully owned guns have


been effective in deterring violence recently is Florida. Since


Florida enacted their concealed carry law their murder rate has


dropped by 29%. Nationwide during this same time the murder rate


has risen 11%. One could then say that when criminals know that


when they go to commit a crime they could very likely run into a


citizen with a lawful firearm they are not so quick to commit the


crimes.


Gun control laws are one of the best things criminals could


hope for because gun laws don?t have any affect on criminals.


Criminals are going to get and use guns illegally whether they


are available to law-abiding citizens or not. The more gun


control rules and regulations there are, the happier the


criminals will be, for they know the more gun laws there are the


less chance they have of having a crime victim defend themselves


with a lawfully-owned firearm. One just has to stop and think to


realize how true this is. No matter how many weapons the


government tries to take away they are still going to be on the


street. Thomas Jefferson said,? Laws that forbid the carrying of


arms, disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined


to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted


and better for the assailants, they serve rather to encourage


than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked


with greater confidence than an armed man.? (Howerter 2) If


anti-gun activists have their way, the government will be able to


confiscate the weapons of law abiding citizens, but not of


people most likely to go on a shooting spree. (Smith 2) What good


is taking away guns from innocent people and leaving them to


criminals? 34% of felons themselves said, that in contemplating


crime they either ?often? or ?regularly? worried that they might


get shot by a would be victim, and 57% agreed that ,?most


criminals are worried about meeting an armed victim than they are


by running into police. 34% of convicts interviewed also said


that they had been, ?scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by


an armed victim,? and about two thirds had at least one


acquaintance who had the experience. (Kates 12) So of course


criminals are going to be the ones wanting gun laws. They don?t


obey them, only law abiding citizens do.


Gun control laws will not stop violence. One does not have


to

look very far to see how true this is. It has been proven over


and over abroad and here in our borders that more laws do not


mean less violence. In such countries as Taiwan and South Africa,


the two nations that most severely restrict gun ownership


(violators are subject to the death penalty), the murder rates


are far higher than in the United States. Just the opposite, in


countries such as Switzerland, Israel, and New Zealand where guns


are much more available than they are here in the US crime and


homicides are virtually nonexistent (Lee 3). This disproves the


theory that guns cause violence. A good example is Israel. Almost


every house hold has weapons of some sort. It is very common for


Israeli households to have more than one fully automatic weapon,


and also to have such things as missile launchers or even bigger


weapons. There they realize that allowing their citizens to have


guns of any kind is a huge asset to the benefit of their country.


History has proven that every nation which has disarmed its


citizenry has ended up with a dictator and a police state with


countless and horrible atrocities. (Howerter 1) One of the most


warped and wicked minds of all time, Adolf Hitler, was a huge


advocate of gun control. Hitler said, ?History shows that all


conquerors who have allowed their subjected people to carry arms


have prepared their own downfall.? (Gun Control Hall of Fame 4)


What he basically meant is that if citizens are allowed to own


guns with out government restrictions than it is virtually


impossible for dictators like himself to get into power. Hitler


also said, ?This year will go down in History, for the first


time, a civilized nation has full gun registration, our streets


will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will


follow our lead into the future.? Is that what our country wants?


Hitler?s idea of safe was rounding up countless millions of


innocent people and slaughtering them just because of their


religion and race. A civilized nation he called it, a more


efficient police. The Gestapo were Hitler?s idea of an efficient


police. He knew that after he had full registration of guns he


could get by with the horrible atrocities that he got by with and


not have to worry about any retaliation from his governed people


because they had no way to go against him.


Mahatma Gandhi, the peaceful protester from India who led


his country to independence from Great Britain, said, ?Among the


many misdeeds of the British Rule in India, History will look


upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms as the


blackest.? (Howerter 1) Great Britain realized that when they


took away guns from India they didn?t have to worry about India


trying to fight for the independence they deserved. When the


citizens of a free nation own guns, it is almost impossible for


the government to take over and become a dictatorship or


socialist.


One would say that what has happened in the past does not


apply to today, or what has happened in other countries that


taken guns away from their people won?t happen in America. They


need to realize how true it is that we either learn from History


or History will repeat itself.


Even in our own country states and cities that have tried to


enact strict gun laws have found them to be ineffective. The


places in the United States where gun control laws are toughest


tend to be the places where the most crimes are committed with


illegal weapons. (Lee 6) Out of the 15 states that have the


highest homicide rates, 10 have very restrictive gun laws. (Lee


6) New York, for example, which has one of the most restrictive


gun laws in the nation has 20 percent of the nations total of


armed robberies. New York is big but not that big. Gun control


does not work. Another example, Washington D.C., since guns were


banned in 1976 the murder rate has risen 200 percent. (Howerter


2) How much proof does one need to know that gun laws do not


effect criminals. Criminals don?t care what the law says. More


gun laws will not reduce crime. The more gun laws there are the


more gun-related crimes there will be. That is a fact.


One should realize after reading this paper that first of


all gun control violates rights guaranteed us by the Second


Amendment, guns prevent crime a whole lot more than they cause


crime, gun control has proven ineffective in stopping crime here


in our country and abroad, past and present, and gun control goes


against everything the forefathers of this country stood for.


George Washington put it like this, ?Firearms are second only to


the Constitution in importance: they are the people?s liberty


teeth.?(Howerter 3) One should stop and think the next time they


go to the ballot box before they start making the little X?s just


who are the people they are voting for. Are they going to try to


enact more rules and regulations on guns as a sort of scape goat


for problems in society, or are they going to uphold the


constitution and go after the real causes of the violence that we


face in our society today. As one man put it so well, ?We have


four boxes used to guarantee our liberty, The soap box, the


ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box. (Howerter 3)


Another man who was vital in founding this country, Benjamin


Franklin, put it this way, ?They that can give essential liberty


to obtain temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.?


(Quotes from the Founding Fathers and their Contemporaries 2)


?Gun Control Hall of Fame.? Members 6. Online. Internet. 14


Feb 2000 Available:


http://members.localnet.com/~bobglifab.htm


Howerter, Mark E. ?Gun Control Isn?t About Guns, It?s About


Control.? Otherside(1996) 3. Online. Internet. 15 Feb


2000. Available: www.otherside.net/guncntrl.htm


Kates, Don B. Jr. ?The Value of Civilian Arms Possession As


a Deterrent to Crime orDefense Against Crime.?


Shadeslanding (1991) 52. Online. Internet. 15 Feb 2000.


Available:


www.shadeslanding.com/firearms/kates.defense.html


Lee, Robert W. ?Shooting Down Faulty Arguments.? The New


American(4 April 1994) 10. Online. Internet. 16 Feb.


2000. Available:


www.thenewamerican.com/tna/1994/vol/vol0no07.htm


?Quotations.? Second Amendment Stuff 3. Online. Internet. 16


Feb 2000. Available:


http://secondamendmentstuff.com/quotation.htm


?Quotes from the Founding Fathers and their Contemporaries.?


Guncite (12 Jan 2000)4. Online. Internet. 16 Feb 2000.


Available: www. guncite.com/gc2ndfqu.html


Smith, Carly. ?Guncontrol Supporters Aiming at Wrong


People.? Generation Y (15 Oct1999) 2. Online.


Internet. 15 Feb 2000. Available:


http://generation-y.com/stories/101599/new_guncontrol.s


html.

Сохранить в соц. сетях:
Обсуждение:
comments powered by Disqus

Название реферата: Gun Control Sucks Essay Research Paper Whenever

Слов:2489
Символов:16332
Размер:31.90 Кб.