The most important part of the US Constitution are the last four words of the second amendment: “shall not be infringed”.
Gun control is necessary in order to have a peaceful city, country and world. Without gun control, many lives will be taken for unnecessary reasons. Not only should things be settled in a different way, but violence is never the answer. Those who do not support gun control show they are for violence and are not thinking in terms of safeness for all. This is why I am pro-gun control
Gun control is a controversial topic that has been around for decades in the United States and all around the world. 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.” (U.S. Const. am. 2)The questions at hand are as follows; what does a “well-regulated militia” entail, should the background checks require more and what are the reasons for gun control? There are two sides to this argument which include the people for gun control who believe guns should be taken off the streets and the ones against gun control who believe it is a right as a citizen of the United States to carry a gun.
The first reason gun control should be in existance is because without law saying otherwise, a gun can be in anyone’s hands. If stricter gun laws were made, more lives would be saved. Not only should there be a standard background check, but I am also a strong supporter of medical background checks. The Council on Foreign Relations states that, “A so-called “gun show loophole,” codified in the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, effectively allows anyone, including convicted felons, to purchase firearms without a background check.” (“U.S. Gun Policy: Global Comparisons”). If there are no boundaries to who can have a gun, anyone and everyone is put at risk. Once it is legal for anyone to have a gun, nothing can be done about it.
Another reason gun control should be enforced is because if not, a mentally unstable person could get a hold of one and do something out of their control. By allowing someone unstable to have a gun, people are just setting themselves up for disastrous conclusions. Dr. Alan Heister states, “Adam Lanza’s actions are explained solely as a manifestation of mental illness” (Huffington Post). If guns were not easy to get then Sandy Hook Elementary would be normal and all of those parents would not be childless. By allowing this problem to occur a first time is unforgivable; doing nothing to stop it from happening again is unprincinpled. Keeping the current laws as they are makes it seem as if there is no sympathy for what happened and now nothing will change.
The final reason that being pro-gun control is effective is the simple fact of safety. Not only is it unsafe for just anyone to have a gun, it is also unsafe for everyone (trained or not) to walk around, armed, at all times. There have been serious incidents where guns were unintentionally fired, but still caused a big problem when they did. In a recent study they have found that, “rather than being used for self-defense, guns in the home are 22 times more likely to be involved in accidental shootings, homicides, or suicide attempts. For every one time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were 4 unintentional shootings, 7 criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides” (Kellermann, A. L., “Injuries and Deaths due to Firearms in the Home”). Having guns available to anyone in a home at any time can lead to serious problems, injuries or deaths. Many cases have also come up where a teenager in the house takes the family gun to school or winds up shooting his own family members. Accident Analysis and Prevention states, “for kids ages 5 to 14, the mortality rate is 14 times higher in high gun ownership states than low gun ownership states. For infants and toddlers, ages 0 to 4, the mortality rate is 17 times higher in high gun ownership states than low gun ownership states.” (Matthew Miller, Deborah Azrael& David Hemenway). Taking guns out of the hands of all people will decrease risks of any non-necessary problems occurring.
The biggest claim that people who are anti-gun control have is that it is taking away their rights to bear arms as a part of the second amendment. (“Against Gun Control.” ThinkQuest. Oracle Foundation.) Yes, this is true, but not only is this claim unfair but it is exactly what gun laws will change. While the people allowed to carry guns feel safer, now the people who don’t want to be around guns feel unsafe. It almost acts as a lose-lose situation but by eliminating the fear of injury or death would be more worth it in the long run. Why should someone fear a gun when if no one had or could carry them, everybody would be safe?
In conclusion, gun control is necessary for a safe place for all. Without gun control, a gun can get in the wrong hands. Also without background and medical checks, someone mentally unstable can get a gun. Overall, having it to were mostly anyone can get a gun is unsafe for everyone. Even though many people believe it would be for the good of the people, I do not think so.