Gun control is a very controversial topic that politicians seem to be using to their advantage in recent polls. Presidential candidates promise that with gun control petty crimes will lower, armed robberies will lower, murders will cease, and the world will be perfect. These radical promises are only touching on a hot button issue so that they will appeal to the mothers who are fearful that their child will be shot on the streets at night. Some say they should enforce truancy and narcotic laws to decrease teen and adolescent violence, but that isn't what this article is about. This article is stating that regulation on guns, in small doses, is not a bad thing; but taking guns away from citizens will not make the United States any safer.
The primary argument against gun control is the United States Constitution's second Amendment: the right to bare arms. Taking away a citizens right to own a firearm would be a direct violation of a persons rights and freedom. This is not reason for any person to strap a pistol to their belt and walk into a local mall. While, yes, it is technically legal because the weapon is not concealed it throws off the balance of one's individual rights and the order of the public. If people become fearful of a person walking around with a gun and the crowd causes a scene the individual can be apprehended for disturbing the peace. One can't be arrested for possessing a firearm, or carrying the firearm in unrestricted areas, but one can be arrested for causing chaos in public.
Federal gun control laws vary from state to state and from parish (county) to parish (county). Federal law states, under the Gun Control act of 1968 (1), that it is illegal for any single, non-permitted, individual to carry guns against state or federal property lines. It is illegal to posses any fully automatic fire arms; this including fully automatic rifles, submachine guns, and fully automatic pistols. It is also illegal to have a concealed weapon on ones person without a valid permit to do so. State laws of course fall under these laws but citizens of the states fall under the state law as well (2). Particularly in Louisiana it is legal to own any semi-automatic rifle, shotgun, or pistol; it is legal to possess any of the said weapons on ones person as long as not concealed or that the serial/ID number has not been tampered with. A permit is required to carry a pistol on one's person, concealed or not. Also, one may not purchase a gun unless said person is at the age of eighteen or older (3).
Now, returning to politicians promising safer streets and better lives with strict gun control laws prohibiting citizen ownership of any type of firearms. The United States has obvious precedents that can be looked at in order to see that prohibition of firearms is not in fact a safe act. In 1996 Australia prohibited citizen ownership of firearms and the use of firearms in self-defense, in hopes that crime would go down. The following crime rate changes took place: "armed robberies rose by 51%, unarmed robberies by 37%, assaults by 24%, and kidnappings by 43%. While murders fell by 3%, manslaughter rose by 16%."(5) Is it possible that the criminals, i.e. people who don't abide by the law, continued to posses their firearms and thought "since it's illegal for law-abiding citizens to use firearms to protect themselves committing crimes just got a whole hell of a lot easier.
(6) Above is a chart showing the assault rate in Australia before and after the gun control act in 1996.
Individuals can decide for themselves, does the United States really need gun control? The same act was passed in Canada, and just like in Australia crime rose. What makes the United States so different? Why will the United States crime rate go down, though every country before the United States had the opposite effect. There is one universal and simple answer: nothing. While, yes, some gun control is not bad; stopping any citizen from carrying a pistol under his or her belt, total gun control can only hurt this country. It has hurt all the other ones.
(1)- http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Zimring68.htm
(2)- http://www.nraila.org/media/misc/FederalFirearms.htm
(3)- http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/gun-possession-use-laws/Louisiana.htm
(4)- http://reporting.journalism.ku.edu/summer07/bradford/concealed_carry%20027.JPG
(5)- http://gunowners.org/sk0703.htm
(6)- http://www.gunsandcrime.org/auresult.html
Before being reviewed I would like to say that I tried multiple times to fix my fourth paragraph. I eventually gave up, please try to ignore it and piece the words together...or tell me how to fix it.
ReplyDeleteEven if they ban guns or require permits, it will not solve gun violence. Individuals that have in their minds that they want a gun will get one by any means neccessary. With guns being legal it takes away the fact that it is used for safety purposes only. Sometimes when an individaul gets a gun they some how seem to go gun crazy and feel that they can use it whenever they want.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteCanadians are allowed to own and posses firearms, their laws are just extremely strict.
ReplyDeleteJosh,
ReplyDeleteI think your chart and reference to Australia and their results really helped to make your case. I would think twice about making guns illegal after reading this. Well stated.
I agree with lexis. There are laws for everything these days, but nothing stops an individual from doing what they want. Gun control would be an amazing thing for society, but it wont stop those who dont really give a care.
ReplyDeleteThe goverment is not even remotely prepared to deal with the back lash for taking a nations since of freedom. The fact is if they make it a "law" that an Americans can't own a gun it won't change a single problem, and this is becuase people break law like uhhh...criminals! So the bad guys would be the ones walking around with loaded firearms when average law abiding citizens would be unarmed and vulnerable. We all have the right to protect ourselves! End of story!
ReplyDelete