Running head: GUN CONTROL

Gun Control
William Renger
University of Texas at El Paso

GUN CONTROL
Abstract
The purpose of this report is to inform the reader about gun control. The reader will see
both sides of the debate and be able to make a decision on their self to pick a side. There

are interesting facts inside the paper about laws that have passed and can pass as of today.
It is important to be informed deeply on this debate because if not already faced with this
issue at your front door, it will one of these days. Your child could be at the next school that
gets shot up or maybe even your own guns are being taken always from you. The debate
goes on today and will go on and the information in this report could help you put an end to
the debate and make history. Just like our founding fathers did when they created the
debate with creating of the second amendment.

GUN CONTROL
Introduction

According to the second amendment of the constitution, Americans have the right to
bear arms. This amendment was put into the bill of rights because Americans and our
founding fathers thought it was a basic right of theirs, which the British took away before
becoming independent of the British. The making of this amendment would create big
issues in the feature, and whenever there is a big issue there is definitely going to be a big
debate. There has been a numerous amount of gun violence incidents around the news
today as well as the past. This has some people asking should ordinary citizens be able to
carry guns or shouldnt there be some kind of strict laws if guns can cause such harm.
While on the other hand, people do not want to give up their guns or have the government
control them with their guns. Of course, everybody wants for there to be no gun violence in
this world and there is always going to be two sides with their own kind of solutions. This
report is going look at if gun violence has risen in recent years, what is gun control, what
should be done about gun violence, and will the implanting of gun control laws reduce gun
violence in America.
Gun Violence in America
Almost everybody has herd on the news, the radio, or Internet about an extreme gun
related incident in America. In 2011, a total of 478,400 fatal and non violent crimes were
committed with a firearm (Planty & Jennifer, 2013). That is, on average, about 1,311
related crimes a day in 2011. That is enough to blow a persons mind a little bit t least. Gun
violence is the spark to the big debate of gun control, especially gun incidents that hit
almost every news cast in the nation. CNN reports that, A gunman, 23-year-old student
Seung-Hui Cho, goes on a shooting spree killing 32 people in two locations and wounds an

GUN CONTROL
undetermined number of others on campus. The shooter, Seung-Hui Cho then committed
suicide. (2014). This was about five years ago on April 16, 2007 at Virginia Tech and

ranks as the number one deadliest mass shooting in United State history. Now the question
is, even though 478,400 crimes were committed in America in 2011 and the incident at
Virginia Tech in 2005 has gun violence gone up in recent years? As you can see in figure
one, since 1993 to 2011 there has been a decline in firearm homicides (2014). This helps
people on the side against gun control
but what the people for gun control
have is out of CNNs top 25 most
dangerous mass shootings fifteen of
them have happened between 1999
and the present.
Gun Control
When people mention the
Figure 1

word gun control, what exactly do

they mean? Does gun control mean the government completely takes away guns or there
will be laws that restrict guns but not completely. Gun control is defined as a set of
legislation that is set to regulate the sale and use of firearms. When someone on the side
for gun control says there should be stronger gun control laws it doesnt exactly mean they
want to do away with guns entirely but regulate them with laws. This does not mean that
some do not want a law to be created that does away with guns but in in a definition stance
it does. In America, all states have different kind of gun control laws some more than

GUN CONTROL
others. The debate is not if there should be gun control but should there be less or more
because already at least every state has some form of legislation on gun control.
Those in favor of gun control want more gun control laws. Congressional Digest
says, In recent years, proponents of gun control legislation have often held that only
Federal laws can be effective in the United States (2013, pg.3). This means those for gun
control laws see that more gun control laws in each state is not going to do the job and the
federal government needs to step in. While those against gun control want the exact
opposite this would mean that every state would have to follow the federal law because it
trumps the states. States like Texas, which has one of the least amounts of gun control,

would be quite against this. The people against gun control do have the Second amendment
on their side. The Congressional Digest describes that, some opponents further believe
that the Second Amendment includes a right to keep arms as a defense against potential
government tyranny, pointing to examples in other countries of the use of firearms
restrictions to curb dissent and secure illegitimate government power (2013, pg.3). This
would totally go against the people for gun control resent views.
Cannot, Could, Commit
What should be done about gun violence? That is the question all politicians and people are
asking themselves. Lets start of by saying what cannot be done.
Kleck (2012, pg. 1384) states in his article: In District of Columbia v. Heller and
McDonald v. City of Chicago, the Supreme Court established that the Second
Amendment protects an individual's right to own a gun for personal use and that
neither the federal government nor state or local governments can abridge this

GUN CONTROL

right. More specifically, the Court ruled that there is a constitutional right to keep a
loaded handgun at home for self- defense.
This means a persons view that guns should be completely taken away from a citizen by
the government is not possible because the Second Amendment safeguards that right.
Through history though, we have seen that what has been decided in a Supreme Court
cases are not set in stone and they can be overturned.
As of now, we do have gun control laws that do restrict what kind of firearm we can
carry. For instance, American cannot have a shotgun that has a sawed off barrel or an
automatic weapon manufactured after 1986. You have to have a concealed handgun license
to be able to carry a handgun with, but do not forget that it has to be concealed. People for
gun control would be happy to hear that there are many other gun control laws that can be
deemed constitutional. According to Hirsh, there are four things the United States
government can do for gun control that is constitutional: the complete ban of all automatic
weapons regardless of the manufacture date, the implications of a firearm licensing system,
Safe storage requirements, and lastly a stricter regulation of firearm dealers and sales
(2013). Hirish four ideas are based on Australias stricter gun control laws and actually
some states in the United States has these laws but the key to all four of these is making
them more strict and enforced in the nation.
President Obama has noticed the gun violence and the cry by the people for more
gun control laws. He has come out in the news and said he is committed to ending gun
violence in America. He has a plan America. According to the White House (2013),
President Obama has four objectives: Closing background check loopholes to keep guns out
of dangerous hands; banning military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines,

GUN CONTROL
and taking other common-sense steps to reduce gun violence; Making schools safer; and
Increasing access to mental health services. The first two of the four objectives are and car

be made into gun control laws. The one thing people against gun control can be happy with
Obamas objective is that he has no intention of taking away all guns or making up any kind
of that pretty much already exist. For example in Rachels news report mentions, Senator
Grassley says he does not support many of the Obama administration's proposals for
stricter gun control. But he does believe there are some proposals in Congress that could
help reduce gun violence (2013). Senator Grassley is a Republican senator from Iowa who
is not for gun control but yet finds some of Obamas idea helpful. Yes, he does want to get
read of assault riffles that are not automatic, which people against gun control would
debate this to be unconstitutional.
Gun Control Results
Lastly, the wonders of if gun control is stricken then will there be results to back it
up. We see that Washington D. C. s results are on the side for people against gun control.
Scott bring up a point that, Washington, D.C. has prohibited home owners from possessing
handguns since 1976. Yet the handgun murder rate there is the highest per capita in the
U.S. and the crime rate is in the top 10 (1994, pg. 25). People against gun control would
say if gun control actually worked the crime in Washington D. C. would actually one of the
lowest in the world but it is quite the opposite. The whole point of gun control is for gun
related crime to go down and if it does not do so what is the point of enforcing them in the
United States. Across the pond in the land down under though stricter gun control laws
have done the opposite. According to Hirsh, quantitative research reveals that the

GUN CONTROL
introduction of strict and uniform gun controls in Australia has resulted in substantial

reductions in gun violence (2013). Here we have two examples with two different results.
Conclusion
There is always going to be two sides to every debate and the debate still goes on till
this day. It seems as though it will go on for a while and wont fine a clean cut, exact answer.
Who is right in this great debate? History one day will tell us but as of right now there are
two sides with good arguments supporting their ideas.

GUN CONTROL
References
CNN Library. (2014). 25 deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history fast facts. CNN
U.S. Retrieved October 12, 2014, Retrieved from

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/16/us/20-deadliest-mass-shootings-in-u-s-historyfast-facts/
Gun control overview. (2013). Congressional Digest, 92 (3), 3-7.
Hirsh, L. (2013). Brothers in arms control: introducing Australian-style gun
control in the United States. Macquarie Law Journal, (12) 81-108.
Kleck, G. (2012). Gun control after Heller and McDonald: what cannot be done and what
ought to be done. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 39 (5), 1383-1420.
Now is the time. (2013, January 16). The White House, Retrieved October 5,
2014, from
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/wh_now_is_the_time_full.pdf
Planty, Ph.D., M., & Truman, Ph.D., J. (2013, May 1). Firearm violence, 19932011. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Retrieved October 6, 2014, Retrieved from
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fv9311.pdf.
Rachel, M. (2013). Gun control debate remains stunted in congress. Weekend
Edition Sunday (NPR)
Scott, P. (1994). Gun control leads to more crime, not less. Alberta Report /
Newsmagazine, 21 (13), 25.