Gun control relates to a set of policies or laws that aim to govern the production, modification, transfer, sale, and utilization of firearms or guns by civilians (Kates & Mauser, 2007). Many nations have a constraining firearm guiding approach with some codifications being liberal. Jurisdictions that govern the firearm accessibility usually limit its access to specific firearm categories. Gun control legislation aims to execute regulations that avert prohibited individuals from firearm possession, restrict the carrying of obscure firearms outside one's home, elucidate conditions that hinder an individual from possessing firearms, and regulate firearm designs to foster personal and public safety. Federal laws proscribe some categories of persons from firearm possession; these include fugitives, individuals sentenced for domestic violence crimes, felons, individuals who are subject to various restraining orders associated with domestic violence, drug addicts, mentally incompetent individuals and individuals who have been accorded a dishonorable discharge from the military. Additionally, federal laws institutes twenty-one years as the minimum age at which an individual can lawfully acquire a handgun from a licensed firearm dealer. The law further establishes eighteen years as the minimum legal age for the possession and transfer of handgun for any individual who is not an authorized firearm dealer. In spite of the efforts by the government to restrict firearm possession, criminals still access guns and therefore, an ineffective strategy for deterring crimes (Kates & Mauser, 2007). Personally, I consider gun control an inefficient way of controlling crimes.
Gun possessions is an efficient way of deterring crimes, unlike gun control. A study conducted on 26th November 2013 revealed that amid 1989 and 2009 the restrictions inflicted upon assault weapon possession did not significantly impact the rates of murder at state levels (Kates & Mauser, 2007). States with limitations imposed on the carrying concealed firearms had a high rate of gun-related crimes. Despite the fact that firearm possession increased twofold in the twentieth century, the incidences of homicide decreased significantly. Substantial evidence reveals that states with an extensive increase in firearm possession exhibit significant decreases in violent crimes. The threat of running into an armed victim in the course of a crime may foster a deterrent effect on a criminal's behavior. Conducted studies in the field of economics and criminology substantiate that the threat of punishment may modify criminal deportment; this particular revelation can be partly elucidated using the Criminological Rational Choice Theory. The theory relies on the attributes that play a significant role in a criminal's decision-making procedure. The idea incorporates weighing the rewards and risks in the victim selection and establishing a balance amid the two elements; this means that the criminal often attempts to maximize rewards and minimize risks when selecting a potential victim. A survey involving the effectiveness of fatal defensive weapons in impacting criminals' decisions conducted among prison convicts in ten states and eighty-one percent of the total surveyed inmates affirmed its efficacy in impeding their decision to commit crimes (Kates & Mauser, 2007).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Secondly, gun control regulations undermines the right to self-defense and restrict the sense of safety among individuals. According to NRA, firearms are utilized in self-defense strategies approximately 2.5 million terms a year. Police aren't capable of protecting every individual all of the time. Studies conducted by Pew Research revealed that stricter gun regulations are likely to make it hard for individuals to protect their families and homes. The right to the medium of defending oneself and right to self-defense is a fundamental right that is based on the right to life. Multiple gun control regulations impede the capacity of law-complying citizens to protect themselves vicious criminals. The only feature that precludes a criminal in possession of a firearm is an innocent person in possession of a gun. Studies conducted by Pew Foundation revealed that a significant number of the individuals attribute their sense of safety to the possession of a firearm (Vizzard, 2015).
Thirdly, gun control regulations do not deter offenders from acquiring guns or violating laws. Of the sixty-two mass shootings in the U.S amid 1982 and 2012, forty-nine of the shooters utilized legally owned firearms. 143 guns were possessed by the murderers with approximately seventy-five percent being lawfully acquired. Gun control laws take away firearms from law-abiding citizens, while potential offenders ignore them. In spite of Chicago implemented strategies that sought to ban all high-capacity magazines, firearm shops, assault weapons, and shooting ranges, Chicago recorded 2,089 shooting victims in the year 2014 and this included approximately 390 murderers (Vizzard, 2015). According to the study conducted by the Bureau of Justice, about thirty-seven percent of the state convicts who possessed, carried, or utilized a gun during their crime execution which subsequently leads to their prison sentencing, obtained the firearm from a friend or family member.
Lastly, Gun laws have minimal or no impact on the occurrence of crimes. Gun control regulations may fail to generate significant decreases in violent crime rates mainly because the prevalence of firearms is not consistent with the rate of crimes; as shown by small weapons and crime trends. The U.S experienced a constant increase in the occurrence of fatal crimes in the 1960s and 1970s. The rate of homicide cases increased steadily during this particular period. During the 1950s, the incidences of homicide instances in the U.S was at 7,020, in the 1960s, it went up to 9,110. By 1970, the rate of homicide cases was estimated to be 7.9 million, and by the year 1980, this rate had significantly increased to approximately 10.2 million (Lott, 2010). There was a significant decrease in the homicide rate in the 1990s by close to 0.8. The sum of privately owned guns has subsequently increased by a remarkable number since the 1950s. Thus, the conclusion is that the advances in private ownership of firearms are not responsible for the subsequent increase or decrease in crime rates over the years.
However, proponents of gun control regulations uphold disparate viewpoints on why the U.S needs to increase gun control regulations. Gun control exponents argue that an increase in the enforcement of gun control regulations will reduce the possession guns among citizens, and this will subsequently lead to significant reductions in gun violence. Another argument supported by the proponents of gun control is based on the conceptualization about the cost incurred due to gun violence. These exponents claim that gun violence enhances a remarkable increase in the medical cost incurred by the gun violence victim, fosters a significant decrease in economic productivity, and that it is associated with various hidden costs which include law enforcement expenses, costs incurred in detaining and prosecuting citizens who break gun laws, and various victimization costs. The third argument posed by gun control proponents is the insufficiency of guns in fostering the self-defense concept (Lott, 2010).
In conclusion, despite the undeterred effort by the proponents of strict gun laws, the high level of restrictions is not relative to the decreased rates of violent crimes. The most significant association amid crime and gun control levels is a positive association amid high gun control levels and high numbers of robbery incidences. Additionally, apart from robbery incidences, gun control regulations do not reveal any significant association with any category of violent crime reduction. Gun control regulations do not deter the reoccurrence of crimes in any way, it breaches the right to self-defense, and it impedes the sense of safety among individuals, it does not forbid offenders from acquiring guns or violating laws, and it has a minimal to no impact on the occurrence of crimes.
References
Kates, D. B., & Mauser, G. (2007). Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide? Harvard Journal 0f Law & Public Policy , 30(2), 649-694.
Lott, J. R. (2010). More guns, less crime: Understanding crime and gun-control laws . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Vizzard, W. J. (2015). The Current and Future State of Gun Policy in the United States . Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology , 104(4), 879-904.
