Recent orders
Gun violence in the US is an emotive topic which arouses many debates in the country
Introduction
Gun violence in the US is an emotive topic which arouses many debates in the country. Case of gun violence rose tremendously in the country over the past years. Gun violence is prevalent in the poor neighborhoods and among male adults. There have been mass shootings of students in schools in various parts of the country. This fueled the clamor for gun control measures. However, establishing policies that effectively control gun violence has proved divisive. The country currently remains divided between those in support for gun control measures and those against gun control. Gun violence and control is my research proposal topic which I aim to research and fully explore.
Kleck, Gary. Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America. New Brunswick, N.J: Aldine Transaction, 2005. Print.
This book by Kleck is useful for my proposal and for my subsequent research. Kleck explores at length the current gun violence situation in the country. This source describes the recent massive killings in the country. According to Kleck, criminals mostly use rifles for gun violence. Other missiles used are handguns. Kleck also exemplifies homicide cases in the country as a form of gun violence. Homicide cases account for approximately 67% of all gun violence cases. Suicides cases are also a major source of gun violence in the country accounting for one-third of all violence cases.
The current number of Americans losing their lives through gun violence is catastrophic. As of this month, approximately 17,885 people lost their lives since the beginning of the year. However, this number may be higher because some media channels fail to air some gun violence cases. The description of the current gun violence in the country provides accurate account of the cases in my proposal. My proposal borrows heavily information on gun violence cases from this source. Kleck’s exploration of the topic inspired me to research on the topic with an aim of coming up with effective policies to curb gun violence in the country.
Reducing Gun Violence in America: Informing Policy with Evidence and Analysis. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013. Print.
This source provides critical analysis of possible policies of reducing gun violence in the country. It provides an insightful examination of effective policies to adopt in order to control gun violence. Among the policies proposed by this source is gun sale regulation. This source proposes stringent regulation of gun sale companies as well as boundary checks on all gun sales.
The policies proposed by this source are the subject of my research questions which include:
What policies can effectively control and reduce gun violence?
Are gun control policies an infringement of the citizen’s constitutional right to own guns? This source enabled me to come up with the above research questions.
DeConde, Alexander. Gun Violence in America: The Struggle for Control. Boston, Mass: Northeastern Univ. Press, 2003. Print.
DeConde also offers an insightful analysis of gun violence case in the country just like the 1st source. This source describes the high profile shootings as well as assassinations of public figures in the country. In addition, DeConde provides the different mindsets and perspectives for and against gun violence. He describes the current impasse on gun control measures. DeConde also provides the challenges facing policies of gun control.
This source provides the controversies surrounding policies of gun control. The constitutional right of ownership of guns is one controversy affecting measures to regulate gun usage. My proposal analyzes this controversy and provides recommendations on the issue.
Cefrey, Holly. Gun Violence. New York: Rosen Pub, 2009. Print.
Cefrey also analyzes the gun violence cases in the country. He dwells on different types of gun violence that includes mass shootings, homicide and guns instigated suicide cases. This source supports gun regulation measures in order to reduce the rampant gun violence cases in the country. Cefrey also provides the perspectives of those against gun control.
This source inspired me to consider gun violence and control as my topic. Cefrey analysis on the issue necessitates the need of actions against gun control. It is for these reasons that I decided to research on gun violence with the aim of coming with objectives that will help avert the current tragedies.
Wright, James D, Peter H. Rossi, Kathleen Daly, and Eleanor Weber. Under the Gun: Weapons, Crime, and Violence in America. New Brunswick, N.J. (U.S.A.: Aldine Transaction, 2006. Print.
The photograph above shows different firearms recovered by police. The photograph shows firearms described by this source used to perpetrate gun violence. These firearms show illegal ownership of ammunitions in America. This source describes the different weapons used for gun violence in America. According to this source, the weapons used in gun violence are mostly rifles and handguns. This source also analyzes the current crime rates in different parts of the country. In addition, it explores the perpetrators of gun violence. It analyzes the race, age and socioeconomic class of gun violence perpetrators.
This source helps me to establish effective solutions that ensure young males do not engage in gun violence. Adoption of macroeconomic policies aimed at providing employment to the adult males will help in curbing gun violence gangs. Therefore this source enables men to establish such insightful solutions.
Carter, Gregg L. Guns in American Society: An Encyclopedia of History, Politics, Culture, and the Law. Santa Barbara, Ca: ABC-CLIO, 2012. Print.
The above image shows one of the uses of guns in America. Gun hunting is an important part of the American culture since the 16th century. In this reward, gun hunters may oppose any gun control measures. Carter describes the use of guns in the American culture as shown by the above image. According to this source, guns are an integral commodity in American societies. Gun usage is deeply engraved in American culture. Carter states that guns were useful during the 16th century during the Westward expansion. During those times, people used guns for self-defense against wild animals and other insurgents as well as for hunting.
This source provides a deep understanding of the preference of guns among some citizens. This understanding is crucial in examining effective recommendations of curbing gun violence.
Ludwig, Jens, and Philip J. Cook. Evaluating Gun Policy: Effects on Crime and Violence. Washington, D.C: Brookings Institution Press, 2003. Print.
Ludwig and Philip evaluate the possible effects of gun control measures. This source examines the advantages and disadvantages of policies to regulate gun violence. It examines the effects of gun regulation on the level of crime rates. This source deeply explores the concern whether gun control reduces crime rates by examining different theories on the issue.
My proposal applies some of the theories of the effects of gun policies on crime rates. For instance explains that gun control may increase gun violence instead of reducing it. This is because gun regulations prevent individuals from defending themselves hence became vulnerable to gun murders. This is not true because gun regulation prevents firearms from reaching gangster groups.
Reducing Gun Violence: Community Problem Solving in Atlanta. Washington, DC: United States. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, 2006. Print.
This is a report on gun violence situation in Atlanta. Atlanta is one of the cities where gun violence is rampant especially among young males. This source proposes communal solutions of solving the problem. One solution proposed is developing social programs that provide economic incentives to young males in order to avoid criminal activities. My proposal adopts this solution as one of the ways of preventing gun violence especially among young males from poor households.
Reducing Youth Gun Violence: An Overview of Programs and Initiatives: Program Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 1996. Print.
This source proposes different measures of reducing gun violence. It establishes concrete policies of reducing gun violence among youths. One policy proposed by this source is implementation of stringent penalties against youths who engage in gun violence. This source proposes such youths incarcerated in juvenile prisons for lengthy durations together with other penalties. This source also proposes provision of employment opportunities to keep youths busy and engaged. I fully support provision of employment opportunities to the many unemployed youths. This will ensure youths are financially stable hence become discouraged to engage in violent crimes.
Cook, Philip J, and Jens Ludwig. Gun Violence: The Real Costs. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Print.
This source examines the costs incurred by the society due to gun violence. Gun violence has several costs to both the society and the government. Among the costs outlined by this source is economic losses incurred by businesses as a result of gun violence. Gun violence disrupts the economic stability of a region hence making businesses to stop operating and incur huge losses. Other costs are legal costs and prison costs incurred due to the incarceration of these criminals. My proposal borrows this information on societal costs of gun violence to push for more control. More gun control ensures the prevention of legal and other societal costs.
Project Safe Neighborhoods: America’s Network against Gun Violence. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance, 2004. Print.
This report by the US Justice Department proposes measures of preventing gun violence in neighborhoods. This source recommends the installation of surveillance cameras in neighborhoods in order to improve security by discouraging crimes. This source also recommends use of security lights and employment of security personnel. This source also encourages the screening of visitors entering these neighborhoods. These policies are crucial in preventing gun violence and I fully support them. There should be emergency exits and alarm alerts in households in addition to the measures proposed by this source.
Goss, Kristin A. Disarmed: The Missing Movement for Gun Control in America. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010. Internet resource.
Goss examines the influence of citizens without guns in the current debate on gun control. Goss establishes that gun owners currently dominate gun control debates. Opponents of gun control are mostly gun owners who are keen to keep their guns. According to Goss, these gun owners ignore the unarmed citizen’s needs opinions. Gun regulation policies should cater for every citizen’s needs without prejudice. Goss assertions are true. The unarmed citizens are missing in the push for more gun control. Policy formulation should focus on every citizen. The unarmed citizens should demand for more gun control to reduce the number of gun ownership.
Torr, James D. Gun Violence. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2001. Print.
This source like the other sources, describes gun violence rates and trends in the country. Torr analyses and identifies household with the most gun violence cases. According to this source, gun violence is prevalent in poor households. Therefore, gun control measures should mainly focus on these households. This is true as most gun violent criminals are unemployed. Gun control measures should entail social programs such as subsidizing education fess and provision of employment opportunities aimed at the poor communities in violent areas. This is in line with this source’s view of controlling gun violence.
Elliott, Delbert S. Violence in American Schools: A New Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2001. Print.
This source examines at the newest type of gun violence that occurs in American schools. Elliot analyzes the causes of gun violence currently experienced in most American schools. According to Elliot, lack of gun regulations is the major cause of this wave of violence in schools. Elliot proposes of stringent measures that bars students from accessing guns. Schools should develop security measures of preventing gun violence in schools. Students should undergo security checks before entering schools to prevent any violence against other students.
Lott, John R. More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 2000. Print.
Lott provides a different perspective on gun control. He prefers less gun control as opposed to gun regulation. According to Lott, the more the number of guns, the less the crime rates. This is because less gun control enables citizens to easily defend themselves. Criminal gangs as a result, will find it difficult to propagate their violence. My proposal differs with this source. More gun regulation will lead to less crime as opposed to Lott’s assertion of increase in crime. The government should implement gun control laws instead of less gun regulations as proposed by Lott.
Conclusion
More gun control is necessary to reverse the current waves of gun violence in the country. The number of people losing their lives as a result of gun violence is shocking and tragic. The country cannot afford inaction in the hope that things will become better. The federal and state governments should conduct background checks on all gun sales. Banning of sale of dangerous ammunitions to the public is necessary. Schools should adopt security checks on all students before entering schools. Provision of social programs is important in order to prevent poor youths from engaging in gun violence. These measures together with others are necessary to reduce gun violence in the country.
Works cited
Carter, Gregg L. Guns in American Society: An Encyclopedia of History, Politics, Culture, and the Law. Santa Barbara, Ca: ABC-CLIO, 2012. Print.
Cefrey, Holly. Gun Violence. New York: Rosen Pub, 2009. Print.
Cook, Philip J, and Jens Ludwig. Gun Violence: The Real Costs. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Print.
DeConde, Alexander. Gun Violence in America: The Struggle for Control. Boston, Mass: Northeastern Univ. Press, 2003. Print.
Elliott, Delbert S. Violence in American Schools: A New Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2001. Print.
Goss, Kristin A. Disarmed: The Missing Movement for Gun Control in America. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010. Internet resource.
Kleck, Gary. Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America. New Brunswick, N.J: Aldine Transactions, 2005. Print.
Lott, John R. More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 2000. Print.
Ludwig, Jens, and Philip J. Cook. Evaluating Gun Policy: Effects on Crime and Violence. Washington, D.C: Brookings Institution Press, 2003. Print.
Project Safe Neighborhoods: America’s Network against Gun Violence. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance, 2004. Print.
Reducing Gun Violence in America: Informing Policy with Evidence and Analysis. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013. Print.
Reducing Gun Violence: Community Problem Solving in Atlanta. Washington, DC: United States. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, 2006. Print.
Reducing Youth Gun Violence: An Overview of Programs and Initiatives: Program Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 1996. Print.
Torr, James D. Gun Violence. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2001. Print.
Wright, James D, Peter H. Rossi, Kathleen Daly, and Eleanor Weber. Under the Gun: Weapons, Crime, and Violence in America. New Brunswick, N.J. (U.S.A.: Aldine Transaction, 2006. Print.
Gun Policy
Name:
Professor
Course
Date:
Gun Policy
In the United States gun control is one of the most controversial topics. There is always an unending back and forth debate in Congress, but no clear solution is easy identified. It is, however, important to discuss this issue while being open-minded. Some people may argue that mass shootings in the US such as that of the Las Vegas strip in October 2017 are brought about by less strict gun laws and increase the rate of gun ownership (Jones, pg. 167-174). According to statistics, it has been proved that the lack of clear gun policies in the United States has actually contributed to gun violence. This paper will look into the issue of gun policy, if gun policies have been implemented and what effects it has resulted in.
The first incident in the United States that may have led to people having a candid discussion on gun control was the assassination of John F Kennedy. Before 1968, getting access to guns by American adults was quite easy. People were also able to get their guns from stores and the mail catalogues sand after the assassination there was a concern on how easy one could get guns including military grade assault weapons. There was a gun control act, the 1968 Gun Control Act and this was the first law that would see the regulation of guns. The act regulated interstate transfer of firearms and the only people who were exempted by these laws were the licenced dealer. This law paved a way for other gun policies and laws that would be introduced both at the state or federal level in order to regulate guns (Jehan, pg. 11).
In 1994, a major law was passed and this was seen as a win on gun control. The Public Safety and Recreational Firearm Use Act passed a ban on use of military style weapons as well as magazines that accommodated more than 10 rounds. The Democrats pushed for this reforms and although they got the backing from the Republicans it was on the basis that the act would expire after 10 years. After 2004, the ban expired and civilians were back to accessing military style weapon. America has recorded the highest number of gun related violence in the world and it is sad that young adults including school going children have been victims of these violence. There are various states that have taken the matter upon their hands and created gun control laws including banning of the assault weapons while certain states are reluctant to do this (Morrall, pg. 45-78). There has been research that have explored various statistic related with gun-related violence and the various measures that have been taken in trying to deal with the issue. With the increase in the number of gun related violence and mass shooting then legislation and discussion on gun control need to happen.
In a research that was conducted by Pew Research Centre, approximately 45% of the Americans have guns. This is close to half the population and begs the question why such a high number of people have guns. Since 1982, there have been more than 110 cases of mass shooting in the United States. Mass shooting accounts for a small percentage of gun violence as others are homicide and suicide cases. Getting guns in the United States has been easy and one can testify this as Adam Lanza the perpetrator of the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting was able to walk into a gun store and bought a military-style weapon that he used to kill innocent children. The laws that exists currently have loop holes and that is why although before one can get a gun a background check is necessary most of the time people get to buy guns without the background check.
Statistics on states that have strict gun laws have proved he importance of gun legislation in helping in gun control thus reducing mass shooting and any gun related deaths or maiming. The top eight most states that have restrictive laws include Hawaii, New Jersey, Connecticut, Illinois, New York, Maryland, Massachusetts and California. These states have greatly reduced the number of gun related incidents that have taken place. States with more permissive rates have been highly ranked on the number of shootings that have occurred and they include Vermont, Louisiana, South Carolina, Texas, Ohio and Arizona. Texas recently experienced a terror attack and no changes in the laws were made. What came as a shock to many actually was the fact that Texas allowed people to carry guns to church after the Senate Bill 535 was approved (Samantha, pg. 109). Although they indicate it’s only for licensed gun owners, this seems to be so much permissibility when it comes to gun laws and restriction to a country that has been wrecked by constant shootings and attacks. The states that have permissible gun laws are making it hard for states that have regulated gun control to have an easy time. An example is the killing of the three people that occurred in Gilroy, California. The gun man travelled from Gilroy all the way to Nevada to buy military-style rifle as he could not do so in his home state. This shows that if Nevada had strict gun laws then this man may not have acquired the said weapon and thus not in a position to carry out the attack. It is also of great concern that the country lacks law on assault or rather military-style weapon. In 1994, there was a Federal Assault Weapon Ban that was passed by the congress restricting the sale of military style and high capacity magazine. Military style weapons ae weapons that can kill a high number of victims in just a span of seconds. Such weapons should have no place or rather should not be carried by civilians but belong to the war zones and in military camps. The ban was passed but had an expiration after 10 years unless renewed by congress thus the ban ended in 2004 and was never renewed. Most were hopeful that the conversation would come up again after the Sandy Hook Elementary Shooting. This conversation did come up but no extreme measures were taken only suggestion of how strict gun laws should be there (Luca, pg. 96). It is however important to point out that there are states that have restriction on military-style weapons but no such laws exist at the federal level.
Gun control is likely to increase sale of guns in the black market. Gun consumers have repeatedly portrayed their love for guns over and over again and made it clear they would not let anyone take that away from them. This was evident when guns were bought that gun shops experienced stock outs. If guns are banned or control, then there is the likelihood that people may decide to use the black market as the source of their guns. Guns found in the black market are often quite cheap as one may even acquire a handgun for less than $100. Most people who are pro-gun ownership have pointed out that gun control laws and banning of weapons may result in people seeking other ways that they could acquire guns and this includes using the black market (Manier). I however think this argument is fictional. Dangerous people over the years have been able to access guns and mostly it is because of the weak laws that are in place. Before we make the judgement on acquisition of guns from the lack market, how about first we pass the laws then get the statistics if this is true. Acquiring of guns from the black market can be regulated through legislation and vigilance from law enforcers who would apprehend individuals found buying or possessing a gun acquired from the black market.
When talking about gun policies it is important to also look at the correlation between crime rates and gun ownership. The correlation between gun laws and crime rates has often been seen as insignificant by the social theorists. An increase in crime rate can be attributed to various factors such as unemployment. It is false to state that countries with the highest rate of gun ownership have an increase in crime rate. The truth of the matter is unemployment may actually contribute to higher crime rates than gun ownership. It is possible to have a lawbreaking society without guns (Lott, pg. 113). In Europe, Russia despite having strict gun laws, the crime rates were at an all-time high from 1965-1999. This is despite low gun ownership rates. The perpetrators opted to use other weapons. While its neighbours Denmark and Germany, have experienced low crime rates despite increase gun possession. While trying to implement gun policies and legislation arguments such as increased crime rates do not really help as those who are pro-guns can be able to water down the argument with factual backing on why this reasoning is not completely correct. Guns although can cause harm, they can also be used for self-defence including bringing down an attacker.
Gun shows act as a catalyst in the increase of crime rates. These claims are quite false since the arms dealers are required to run background checks. The notion that that gun shows are the reasons why a large number of firearms are accessible to criminals is false. Background checks are put in place to keep guns out of reach for dangerous people. Instead of blaming gun shows better checks should be put in place to catch early warning signs since many gun violence offenders have been able to pass the screening. Case in point is the attacker named Nikolas Cruz was able to pass the screening and acquired a rifle which he later on allegedly killed 17 people at a south Florida high school. These loopholes of not being able to identify people who have suffered from mental disorders and later on commit crimes need to be sealed
Politicians propel their agendas by prying on peoples fear about gun control. Over the years the debate about gun control has often been a debate between the Republicans and the Democrats (Spitzer, pg. 126). By looking at even the funding of the Republican politicians you will find that they get the backing of people who do not want to have gun control. Although the constitution needs to be respected, the issue of gun control and right to bear arms need to be respected. When our fore fathers were drafting the constitution, they did not envision the kind of gun violence that is being witnessed. Politicians need to have a more candid ad clear conversation on gun policies without leaning on any political sides.
The massacres and shootings are dreadful and unacceptable. However, introducing more stringent rules will not solve the problem at hand as it is quite possible for a criminal to pass through various screenings such as background checks (Nilsen). Gun control does not guarantee crime free society. It is true to say that the politicians and to some extent the media have blown things out of proportion. The politicians who use peoples fear on matters crime to fuel their agenda on matters gun control. Contrary to common misgivings crime rate is no way fuelled by an increase in gun possession by individuals. According to research conducted most citizens feel safe owning a firearm. The focus should not be on gun control policies as a way to solve the crime. They should find the underlying issue to entirely curb crime and violence.
It is important that we have the conversation on ways that we can regulate and reduce the number of guns that are available in the market. This may be a step by step transition, for example, legislators may first begin by trying to ban the assault rifles as well as the high capacity magazines. Such laws will ensure that weapons that are more likely to cause havoc in just a couple of minutes are not easily available to the market for purchase by the attackers. States too need to be vigilant on the laws they create on gun control. States that have strong gun control laws have experienced a decline in number of gun related violence and thus other states should also follow suit. Loss of life due to laws that can be altered is unacceptable
Works Cited
Works Cited
Jehan, Faisal, et al. “The burden of firearm violence in the United States: stricter laws result in safer states.” Journal of injury and violence research 10.1 (2018): 11.
Jones, Michael A., and George W. Stone. “The US gun-control paradox: Gun buyer response to congressional gun-control initiatives.” Journal of Business & Economics Research (JBER) 13.4 (2015): 167-174.
Lott, John R. More guns, less crime: Understanding crime and gun control laws. University of Chicago Press, 2013.
Luca, Michael, Deepak Malhotra, and Christopher Palanquin. The impact of mass shootings on gun policy. No. w26187. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2019.
Manier, Lauren. “Does Gun Control Really Work?” National Center for Health Research, 12 Apr. 2018, http://www.center4research.org/does-gun-control-really-work/.
Morrall, Andrew. “The science of gun policy: a critical synthesis of research evidence on the effects of gun policies in the United States.” Rand health quarterly 8.1 (2018).
Nilsen, Tara Golshan & Ella. “Vox.” 27 Feb 2018. Vox. 17 March 2018. <https://www.vox.com/2018/2/27/17053968/gun-control-debate->.
Santhanam, Laura. “Most Americans Support These 4 Types of Gun Legislation, Poll Says.” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, 10 Sept. 2019, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/most-americans-support-stricter-gun-laws-new-poll-says.
Spitzer, Robert J. Politics of gun control. Routledge, 2015.
GUN CONTROL
GUN CONTROL
Student’s name
Instructor
Department of affiliation
Course
Date
Gun Control
The united states have laws that are both at the federal level while others are at the state level to control guns and their usage. These laws determine transfer, buying, selling, manufacture, record keeping, ammunition, destruction, transport, and the accessories of firearms. These laws are mainly pushed forward and maintained by the state government agencies and the federal bureau of tobacco, firearms & explosives, and alcohol. The second amendment enables individuals to buy and the general control of the gun markets and usage as well as production and the types of guns that can be available in the markets and which ones cannot be allowed in the market. However, even with these regulations, which have been in place for a long time, there are still witnessed shootings. The USA has been rated among the top countries which have mass shootings or individuals use guns in the wrong manner and therefore even the more effort for the individuals and the government to ensure protection. This paper discusses gun laws and gun control in the United States of America.
Firstly, some young people are always amazed by guns, which makes them wish to own guns. Therefore when they reach an age they can own guns, they get to buy their weapons and, in the spirit of adventure and goodwill of personal protection, train themselves to use the guns. With time they become outstanding, and they get to know what is needed to use a gun. However, having a firearm in youth is a problem because when they are agitated or made grossly angry by something, they tend to use their guns to fight back. This leads to more suffering and makes a person unable to own the gun for some time. However, with the correct use of firearms, there is a future of the country whereby the guns are only used whereby there is a critical need for the use of the gun needed (Boylan et al., 2013).
The national firearms act is the act that taxes the transfer and the manufacture of firearms. Federal firearms act of 1938 states that those who must purchase guns should also have the federal government’s approval. This act also protects the public from the wrong people in whose hands if a firearm lands, there can be chaos in the society because there is a likelihood of the guns being misused. An example of this kind of individuals includes convicted felons. This act, therefore, is a significant part of gun control because some people getting guns means that the community around them will significantly suffer. They will most probably think that it is their right to do whatever they wish to regain what they have lost during their conviction hand. Through this, they are likely to hurt the people around them.
The omnibus safety streets and state control act of 1968 increased the age at which a person can own guns up to 21 years and prevent inter-state trade in firearms. This meant that only the manufacturers who could take the guns to the states and not the state could supply guns to another. It also meant that even if a young person was 18 years they could not get a gun because they were probably to misuse it. This is an apparent judgment that a person at the age of 18 cannot use their weapon correctly, but at the age of 21, they are mature enough to do what is right and wrong and use their guns properly (Carter, 2006).
There are also other laws enacted by the federal government, whose discussion continues below. These were to make sure that the guns are safely handled because the selling of firearms can mean violence within America if there are no laws to govern their proper usage. Undetectable firearms act criminalizes the sale of weapons with more than 3.7 OZ of metal content. This means, therefore, only those arms which have fewer sizes could be sold, and it also meant that most people should not detect the firearms if a person carries them (Sparrentak et al., 2018). This was to protect the American society from the effects of people carrying guns around like everyone was a security officer. It also meant that some people and especially children, were frightened when they saw guns, and there was a need to protect them by allowing the public to own guns that were undetectable through sight and other means of being sold. It also meant that a person might have had their loved ones killed using guns, and for their respect and efforts to help prevent them from remembering such issues, this act was passed.
The gun-free schools’ zones act of 1990 emphasizes that a person cannot own a gun within a school environment. This means that the students studying have to be protected to the maximum from such products and items which could make their life very difficult. This act tries to be to the individuals within a school environment a natural setting for learners to grow, interact with one another, and create peace through other means apart from using guns since where a firearm is used most probably there is no understanding there is no peace.
Law enforcement officers’ safety act of 2004 allows law enforcers to carry undetectable guns across states regardless of the state laws, however, with a few restrictions. This law also applies to formerly law enforcement officers since their protection is critical against the public gun owners who can mess with their guns. The closest law enforcement individuals are supposed to arrive at the scene as fast as possible and clear the confusion caused by the wrongful use of firearms. For this operation to be successful, therefore these individuals need to have guns for their protection and training.
Protection of lawful commerce in the arms act of 2005 makes sure that even if a person uses their guns correctly, the blame does not fall under the firearm manufacturer but under the person misusing the firearms. Therefore a person who misuses their weapon is liable for their crimes and not be blamed on the manufacturers. This protects the manufacturers and makes them be able to have peace when operating and continue to produce firearms most of the time. They are the companies that provide the state and the federal government with weapons for security officers and other officers who use guns very frequently. This means that if the manufacturers were sued or many complain about their guns, their production capacity would be interfered with and unable to produce firearms, especially when they are most needed by the states and the federal government (Lester, 1988).
Along with these acts, there also came up with what is known as those allowed to own guns and those who cannot own guns. For example, if a person is a fugitive cannot own guns. Fugitives are those convicted with a sentence of more than one year, whether in the past or present. It also means those individuals who were involuntarily taken to a mental hospital due to mental health issues. The two groups of individuals are termed as very high risks if they are provided with guns. For those taken to mental hospitals, there is a likelihood of a person using the gun to hurt themselves, while the same applies to those sentenced for over one year. However, those convicted have a higher percentage and likelihood of hurting others. In contrast, those taken to mental hospitals have a higher possibility of hurting themselves, and therefore both risks are not desired (Carter, 2006).
Forty-four states have a provision in their constitutions aligned with the second amendment on the ownership of guns. However, states like California, Minnesota, new york, new jersey, Iowa, and Maryland have exceptions (Jacobs, 2002). However, in a new york state, there is a statutory civil rights act that is almost similar to the second amendment.
The history of gun control is also essential to look at and from this, therefore, be able to fully understand what it means to own a gun and where it all began. The first discussion about gun ownership in the united states happened in 1791 when the second amendment was brought into place. However, there has been massive misuse of guns over the past whereby for example, in 1934, there was the valentine’s day massacre. It led to even stricter laws and amendments to be put into place to protect American society and the protection of the manufactures and the government. During this period under president Roosevelt, the national firearms act was brought into the home. It imposed a $200 tax on the manufacture of title II guns. The amount by 2009 was around $4000. The registration of short-barrelled firearms, machine guns, heavy weapons, explosive ordnance, shotguns, improvised firearms, and suppressors was also a must under this act (Sparrentak et al., 2018).
In the 1960s, there were also more amendments due to the assassination of Martin Luther King junior and john f. Kennedy. President Lyndon was the one who pushed Congress for the gun control act of 1968. This act broadened the definition of a machine gun, replaced the EFA, and regulated self-destructive devices like bombs, mines, and grenades. In 2008 McDonald v. Chicago, the court ruled that the second amendment applies against the states. In Caetano v. Massachusetts, the supreme court interpreted the second amendment more clearly. It stated that it applies even to those instruments which are considered arms and which were not in existence during the time of the second amendment (Jacobs, 2002).
Those allowed to own guns include; green card holders, citizens of the united states, lawful permanent residents of the USA, nationals but non-citizens of the united states of America, among other individuals. However, the use of guns comes along with restrictions. Therefore it is complicated to own a gun and use it in the manner a person wishes to serve personal needs without thinking first of the American society (Boylan et al., 2013).
In conclusion, firearms and gun control laws are essential in the allowance of public ownership of guns. This means that, without the above-discussed laws and amendments towards the use of firearms, society is not at peace with one another. People can do anything as long as it serves personal benefits or the benefits of a particular group of individuals in a lawless society. This is made impossible by the laws. Therefore personal protection and defense come as the only and priority in issuing guns to the public. Consequently, it is an integral part of American society, and society needs to hold on to the rules for the safety of each member of the community.
References
Boylan, M., Kates, D. B., Lindsey, R. W., & Gugala, Z. (2013). Debate: Gun Control in the United States. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®, 471(12), 3934-3936.
Carter, G. L. (2006). Gun control in the United States: a reference handbook. ABC-CLIO.
Jacobs, J. B. (2002). Can gun control work?. Oxford University Press.
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), 884-886.