Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 7

Carballal 1

Nico Carballal
Ms. Gardner
English 10 Per 2
11 May 2015
Seizing the Killer
Those in opposition of the enforcement of harsher gun control laws argue Guns dont
kill people, people kill people, yet never has the fight against the use of guns been greater than
in society today (At Issue). The idea of imposing stricter gun laws by restricting the types of
guns one can have and who can own them has caused a schism between gun advocates and gun
opposers. In society, guns are either a signal of safety or a sign of danger depending on who one
asks; however, most agree that America must ultimately choose between submission to or
restriction of guns in order to promote unity among the American people. Because of the current
flexibility of gun laws, citizens do not feel safe from danger in their communities. As gun
advocates object to strongly-enforced gun laws, more conservative laws must be enforced,
lessening the amount of guns inappropriately placed in the hands of Americans, augmenting the
sense of societal safety and reducing violence in communities.
Initially, because of the rights presented in the Second Amendment and the selfprotection from crime provided by guns, the opposing position argues that guns should be an
open part of the American society. It is arguable that guns in a society do not cause violence; they
prevent it. Supportively, USA Today writer John R. Lott discloses "With just one exception, every
public mass shooting in the USA since at least 1950 has taken place where citizens are banned
from carrying guns (qtd. in Juliano). Primarily, this seems sensible; however, the words mass
shooting implies the fault as a result of the presence of a gun. Similarly, Larry Craig, writer for
The New York Times, demonstrates the data shows that the areas of our country with the most
draconian restrictions on firearms have the highest levels of crime...only criminals have access to

Carballal 2

guns (Craig). Another potential claim about gun laws is that the restrictions in certain states
have become so severe that criminals have a great advantage because they can acquire what most
law-abiding citizens cannot. However, the implementation of additional guns, a possible solution
that many gun advocates suggest, will not be used solely for protection from crime as one may
suppose. Contradictorily, as extra guns are introduced into a community, more irrational
decisions will be made with these deadly weapons by asinine Americans for small crimes or
mass homicides. Those in opposition of stricter laws cite the Second Amendment as proof of
guns to be liberators and symbols of American freedom rather than killing machines. They
benefitted the founders of the United States of America, and ever since, this country and society
has been built on the inherent right to acquire a gun for self-protection. Marian Wright Edelman,
writer for The New York Times, contradicts this: The Second Amendment was not intended to be
a license for mass murder, yet people still continuously refer to the Amendment as a reason to
maintain the use of guns in society (Edelman). If these supposed killing machines are harmful to
a society, why are they central to the lives of people in other parts of the world, such as a Swiss
citizen, with Switzerland being a country with only .5 gun homicides per 100,000 residents? Gun
advocates assert that this fact proves when there is a general acceptance, guns do not have to be a
danger or a worry as Helena Bachmann from TIME Magazine illustrates (Bachmann). In
Switzerland, this may function seamlessly; however, this psyche can not be imposed on the
American people because of the doubt and uncertainty present as a result of the the
indecisiveness of the present gun laws. This indecisiveness must be resolved soon; as a possible
solution, opponents of gun control laws, such as members of the National Rifle Association
(NRA), argue that guns are saviors of lives and the symbol of American freedom rather than the
instigators of murders. Therefore, those who desire to protect themselves with these honorable
safeguards should be able to obtain one. Those in the NRA and other pro-gun legislations have
built their arguments on tradition and have built a family upon this foundation. As Jim Porter,

Carballal 3

former president of the NRA, exclaimed in an annual speech, You raise good families, build
strong communities and, in the face of every threat, you stand up and defend freedom (Annual
Meeting Exhibits 2015). However, through this family, arguments are made that are void of
reason, full of fallaciousness, and focused on history rather than the modern situation. While it is
true that in some scenarios, guns can be the saviors of lives, they are constantly at the core of
homicides and tragedies that would occur less often with tighter gun laws across the country.
It is true that guns established the foundation of America and have saved lives in a variety
of situations. Nevertheless, it is impossible to reason that more guns are still necessary in this
modernized American society that already contains excessive amounts of these fatal weapons in
the hands of the inexperienced. Dan Bitto, writer from University Wire, reveals that the 233
million guns that are owned by 80 million separate people represent the amount of guns in the
United Statesevery single one with the potential to kill. Comparatively, there are
approximately 318 million people living in the United States. One in every four people own a
minimum of one gun, each holding a bullet with the potential to kill. Two hundred and thirty
million guns are well above the necessary amount to protect 318 million people; in fact, it is
serving as a means of less protection and now as a cause of further violence. Still, people
continue to buy guns adding to the 233 million guns already present in the United States for
several different motives: self-protection, hunting, crime, murder, and more, yet people still
ignorantly wonder why there were a devastating 11,622 homicides by firearm in 2012 [in the
US] as Nick Wing, writer from The Huffington Post, reveals, and even more still in 2013. As
additional guns are introduced, people will continue to feel like they need one themselves, and if
the number of guns in America accumulates, gun law advocates may begin to feel they need one
even though it goes against their firm beliefs. Stricter gun laws must be enforced soon in order to
reduce this rising number or else the task of decreasing the number of guns used in the American
society will be near impossible.

Carballal 4

The sense of safety and trust in a community is essential for the acceptance of guns;
however, in current society, the 233 million guns present only cause feelings of uneasiness,
worry, and doubt. Dan Bitto uncovers that the United States has the highest private gun
ownership rate of any country in the world. The prevalence of these weapons results in an
apprehension among the people that cannot be eliminated as the Swiss have been mostly
successful in accomplishing. Americans feel less secure as more weapons are introduced into
their communities. Bitto also reveals that 90 percent [of people] believe that regular citizens
should be prohibited from bringing guns into restaurants, hospitals, college campuses, and places
of worship (Bitto). Gun advocates disagree with the presence of guns in public areas, especially
in the hands of those untrustworthy, proving that reason can be found amidst the schism between
gun advocates and gun opposers; however, those in support of gun use still defend the presence
of the weapons in the hands of those who have experience. In Denmark, a middle ground has
been found in between very strict and relaxed gun laws which guarantees guns only in the hands
of those with tremendous experience. In order to obtain a gun in Denmark one must read a book
1,000 pages long, Copenhagen dealer Tonni Rigby explains, and one must know all of it(qtd.
in Witte). Very effectively, the Danish have implemented a system which prevents the
widespread sale of guns, yet guns are still present in a community in case of a disruption of the
peace, resulting in an overall sense of societal safety. Something similar to the Danish systems
thorough form of testing which has resulted in .27 gun homicides per 100,00 citizens(Witte)
would be effective in the United States as those who desire a gun can have one, yet they will be
profoundly aware of the dangerous weapon they hold in their hands when they purchase a gun
because it will be necessary to endure a vigorous process of learning the threat of guns. While
tighter laws are still needed in order to limit what type of guns people can have, this system may
function in determining how one can obtain a gun. This will make the citizens in a community
feel safer as they are protected by those with remarkable experience. Regardless, worry is caused

Carballal 5

when danger is present, so when there is a lack of strict laws preventing the public possession of
guns, those who desire equanimity in their community have to be fearful in a place where fear
should not be needed. Conclusively, as a result of the presence of guns in our society, there are
feelings of unnecessary apprehensiveness which would be eliminated with the tightening of gun
regulations, similar to what Denmark has done, resulting in a society comforted by the
knowledge that they are in a secure environment protected only by those with experience.
Ultimately, stricter gun laws should be enforced because they will have a great impact on
lessening the violence and crime on the streets. Wing exposes that The U.S. gun homicide rate
for the year was 2.2 per 100,000 residents, according to United Nations Office on Drugs and
Crime . Comparatively, this is four times greater than that of the Swiss, eight times greater than
that of the Danes, and an incredible eleven times greater than that of the Australians. In Australia,
the effectiveness of firm gun laws is explicitly demonstrated. Australian gun laws are very strict
while American laws are relatively flexible; consequently, The UNODC reveals that Australias
homicide rate is extremely low for a country of its magnitude (Wing). In Australia, it is nearly
impossible to obtain a gun, and if someone were to own one, the country is incredibly restrictive
in what type they can have and where they can have it. Assault rifles and submachine guns are
not reasonable solely for protection in society; therefore, these types of guns are completely
forbidden from Australian society. For several years, Australia did not encounter a mass public
shooting as of a result of their uncompromising gun laws while one will frequently hear news of
a tragic public shooting in the United States. Their strict system has resulted in a society where
crime is low and gun-related murders are rare. Unfortunately, it is too late to incorporate this
simple system into American society because of the sheer amount of guns currently present in
America, yet it is still possible to attempt to replicate it by the addition of rigid gun laws. Simply
stated, guns are the primary weapons used in homicides, robberies, and crimes across the
country, yet an incomprehensible desire exists with the intention to halt violence by releasing

Carballal 6

new weapons into society. There is no sure way to guarantee the addition of guns in society will
solely be used for protection and not violence. Therefore, if stricter gun laws are enforced, the
first step would be to lessen the 233 million guns in the United States in order to mitigate the 2.2
gun homicides per 100,000 citizens, eliminating the notion that the country is one of the most
unruly, homicidal countries in the world because of these killers.
As the inexplicable intention of gun advocates to introduce more weapons into society
stimulates in popular favor among Americans, laws that prevent the spread of these weapons to
those who are inexperienced must be implemented in order to halt the growth of weapon use in
society. When one exemplifies other countries, both in support and against the use of these fatal
possessions, it is impossible to reason that guns are still necessary in this knowledgeable
American society with the greatest statistic of gun-related homicides per year in the world.
Without gun laws that impose regulations on which guns one can have and who can obtain guns,
there will be a sense of anxiety among Americans in a community; consequently, the number of
gun-related crimes and tragedies will only increase. A significant number of people must unite in
advocating for the enforcement of these laws; only then will real action be taken through the
formation of laws that prevent the effortless access to these killers, establishing stability and
unity amongst this sharply divided United States of America.

Works Cited
Annual Meeting Exhibits 2015. Narr. Jim Porter. Nashville. 11 Apr. 2015. Performance.
"At Issue: Second Amendment and the Right to Bear Arms." ProQuest LLC. 2015: n.pag. SIRS Issues
Researcher. Web. 11 Apr. 2015.
Bachmann, Helena. "The Swiss Difference: A Gun Culture That Works | TIME.com." TIME. N.p., 20 Dec.
2012. Web. 11 Apr. 2015.

Carballal 7
Bitto, Dan. "Pro/Con: Gun Legislation." University Wire. 16 Jan. 2015: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 09
Apr. 2015.
Craig, Larry "Is It Too Easy to Get a Gun in America?." New York Times Upfront (Vol. 140, No. 1). Sept. 3
2007: 28.SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 11 Apr. 2015.
Edelman, Marian Wright "Is It Too Easy to Get a Gun in America?." New York Times Upfront (Vol. 140, No. 1
). Sept. 3 2007: 28.SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 11 Apr. 2015.
Juliano, Elisa. "Pro/Con: Gun Legislation." University Wire. 16 Jan. 2015: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web.
09 Apr. 2015.
Wing, Nick. "With Just 40 Gun Murders In Australia In 2012, Sydney Hostage Crisis Looms
Large." The Huffington Post. N.p., 5 Dec. 2014. Web. 12 Apr. 2015.
Witte, Griff, and Karla Adam. "Europe Confronts New Gun Culture." Washington Post. 20 Feb. 2015: A.1.
SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 11 Apr. 2015.