Abstract
The licit grounds of firearm possession are covered in the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. The Second Amendment holds that 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 (Lund & Winkler, 2015). This provision by the Second Amendment has however, been a subject of a lot of controversies in America. Gun control laws remain the most contentious issue in American political affairs today. There have been calls for implementation of stricter gun control policies following incidences as mass shootings. DW (2018) highlights the conditions for gun acquisition in the United States. Such prerequisites include selling firearms to only those who are above 18 years of age, verification of mental health of and conducting background checks on gun buyers, and the need for only bearers of Federal Firearms Licenses to sell guns. In addition, there are also arguments on the needs of acquisition of state permission before being allowed to travel with firearms (DW, 2018). Opponents of control arguments however, fear for safety loss with the implementation of gun control policies.
Introduction
An estimated 114, 994 Americans are shot annually (DW, 2018). This statistic includes assaults, police intervention, suicides and suicide attempts, murders and accidents. This alarmingly high figure paints the picture of a nation where gun violence is prevalent. As a result, campaigns calling for implementation of tighter gun acquisition policies have been witnessed in the streets every time an act of gun violence transpires. The effectiveness of implementation of stricter gun policies in America is questionable. This research proposal therefore, is set to explore whether more austere gun regulations will help reduce murder rates in the United States.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Literature Review
Vittes, Vernick and Webster (2013) conducted a survey on the relationship between gun acquisition and use in the United States. In their research, they explored the means by which gun violence convicts in the federal correction facilities gained their guns and what they used them for afterwards. In their survey, the trio also examined the gun policies of the different states the prisoners originated from (Vittes, Vernick & Webster, 2013, p. 27). Their research revealed that were the firearms not illegally acquired, about 40% of the prisoners should have not been allowed to purchase guns due to their past criminal records. An additional 31% would have been prohibited from acquiring firearms due to mental health concerns (Vittes, Vernick & Webster, 2013, p.27). Only 13.4 % of the convicts’ firearms were acquired through legal means (Vittes, Vernick & Webster, 2013). This research divulged that a high percentage of illegally acquired weapons were used to commit crime.
On the same note, Valle and Glover (2012) set out to determine how the rights to carry along weapons impacted homicide rates. They conducted their research by investigating the trends of homicide deaths and attempts in 57 major cities in states with different gun policies in the United States. Their research revealed one major fact. It came to be known that states that offered their residents the outright rights to carry and conceal guns reported high rates of homicides (Valle & Glover, 2012, p. 597). The cities located in states where the rights to carry firearm along with oneself once one is of age was given subject to a variety of factors reported low rates of homicides (Valle & Glover, 2012).
Geier, Kern and Geier (2017) elaborated the connection between gun availability and gun violence. The focus of their research was to link household gun availability to occurrences of violence while giving specific attention to such factors as race, gender and geographical factors such as location of states or cities, population density and poverty (Geier, Kern & Geier, 2017). The research showed that indeed instances of certain types of gun violence were more widespread in locations where more households were in possession of firearms. This did not however certainly comprise of gun use for robbery (Geier, Kern & Geier, 2017, p. 330). According to Geier, Kern and Geier (2017), gun use for robbery was influenced by such factors as unemployment, alcoholism, poverty, and population density. Some areas reported possession of a lot of firearms but crime rates were surprisingly low. The research therefore was therefore a revelation of the fact that more guns mean more crime. Advancing the argument on the link between gun possession and gun violence, Hoskin (2011), affirmed that less guns does not mean less crime.
Method of Research
The research method to be used in this proposal is best described as a fact-finding and application method. The research is aimed at investigating the relationship between gun control policies and gun-related deaths in states with differing gun regulation policies. To achieve this, the research will rely on published government and academic sources containing statistics of gun deaths in different states in the United States. Aside from government and scholarly sources, the research will also involve interviewing of samples of post-high school students in different states. The states of choice in this research proposal are Alaska, New Mexico and New Hampshire. The samples in this research design are therefore the print sources as well as the students. Data on gun violence obtained from the print sources as well as survey of the student samples will be compared against each other. This will be the unit of analysis of the research proposal. The purpose of this comparison is to come up with a relationship between gun violence; murder in this case.
Findings
Study of the gun control policies in the states of Alaska, New Mexico and New Hampshire revealed that the gun control regulations were vastly dissimilar in the three states. In Alaska for example, no permission is required to carry along a gun with oneself. In New Mexico on the other hand, state permission is mandatory before one is allowed to carry a concealed firearm. New Hampshire reported perhaps the most unique gun control policy. The state’s policy on gun control state that one does not require a permit to walk around with a concealed gun in the state. However, the state prohibits its residents from travelling with loaded firearms on their bodies or in their cars. On deaths resulting from gun attacks, suicides and accidents, Alaska reported the highest figures. New Mexico came at second place of the three states. New Hampshire reported the least number of gun deaths regardless of the fact that natives of New Hampshire do not need state permission to carry concealed firearms along with them unless they want to do so whole travelling on their vehicles.
Conclusion
The results of this research revealed that there is no clear relationship between gun control policies and gun violence. This research disclosed that some other factors come into play as far as gun violence is concerned. In Alaska for example, the natives are permitted by the state laws to carry handguns. From the research, Alaska reported the highest deaths resulting from firearm attacks and accidents. One would expect that that will be same case with New Hampshire where the state laws also allow residents to carry concealed weapons. Surprisingly, New Hampshire has the fewest deaths resulting from gun attacks. The figures are way much less compared to New Mexico where there are regulations in place barring residents from carrying concealed firearms. The factors suspected to be responsible for the divergences in deaths resulting from gun attacks in New Hampshire and New Mexico include differences in poverty level and population composition. New Mexico, despite having stricter gun control policies is composed of people from different ethnicities. These include both Native Americans and Hispanics as well as Mexicans. The poverty rates in New Mexico are also higher in New Mexico as compared to New Hampshire. Gun control policies therefore, whether strict or not, bear insignificant impacts on gun violence. It is therefore the responsibility of every citizen of the United States to ensure that they use their gun possession rights to only protect themselves, and others when need arises. The government is also urged to heighten safety measures regarding gun acquisition. Thorough background checks should be conducted to ensure that those who are mentally unstable, underage and people with criminal records do not get to access and possess firearms.
References
DW. (2018). 8 facts about gun control in the US. Retrieved September 11, 2018 from https://www.dw.com/en/8-facts-about-gun-control-in-the-us/a-40816418
Geier, D.A., Kern, J.K., & Geier, M.R. (2017). A longitudinal ecological study of household firearm ownership and firearm-related deaths in the United States from 1999 through 2014: A specific focus on gender, race, and geographic variables. Preventive Medicine Reports, 6, 329-335. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2017.04.004
Hoskin, A. (2011). Household gun prevalence and rates of violent crime: a test of competing gun theories. Criminal Justice Studies, 24(1), 125-136.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1478601X.2011.544445
Lund, N., & Winkler, A. (2015). The Second Amendment. Retrieved September 11, 2018 from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2662700
Valle, J.M., & Glover, T.C. (2012). Revisiting licensed handgun carrying: Personal protection or interpersonal liability? American Journal of Criminal Justice, 37(4), 580-601. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12103-011-9140-4
Vittes, K. A., Vernick, J. S., & Webster, D. W. (2013). Legal status and source of offenders' firearms in states with the least stringent criteria for gun ownership. Injury Prevention , 19(1), 26-31. DOI: 10.1136/injuryprev-2011-040290
