Essays Against Gun Control

Argumentative Essay On Gun Control
Samira Rastegar
Argumentative Essay
ESOL 0054 – 81003
Dr. Dogger
Nov 15, 2017
The Gun Control
Gun control is a controversial topic that has been around for decades in the United States and all
around the world. After the recent terrible events, it has become an issue of controversy between the
two groups that agree and disagree with gun control. Between 1970 and 2000, firearm injuries in the
United States annually has 32,703 deaths. After motor–vehicle crashes, firearm injuries are second
leading reason of injury and death in the United States.Majority of people that are against with gun
control believe that gun can help them for self–defense in home and society. However, other people
believe that if we reduce the number of guns in our society, we will reduce the amount of
violence. There are many reasons for gun control. Let's focus on three main reasons: manic people,
economy issue, and accident by children. First, the crazy person is one of the reason of gun
control. Studies show, increased risk of committing to violence against other if people have serious
mental illness like schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and depression. Individually if perpetrators are
using drug and alcohol, and they are not tacking medical treatment. (Cook, Goss 71). Also, review
of more than 20 studies showed that commit to violence among mentally ill people are three to five
times more than other people. (Cook, Goss 72). For example, the gunman behind the worst mass
shooting in Texas
Get more content on HelpWriting.net

Against Gun Control Research Paper
Gun Control (Against)
Gun control is a law that controls how guns are sold and used, and who can own them. Allowing
people to possess and use a gun with legal documents in the United States is legal. There have
been arguments on whether or not is should be legal to own a gun as some people see it as
beneficial and others do not. It is believed that guns are beneficial to have, and they are there
because we need to be able to protect ourselves. We should not allow the government to have power
over gun control for many reasons including the loss of tradition of hunting, not being able to
protect ourselves, and simply because of the second amendment.
Hunting has been around for as long as people have been on this earth and if that were taken away
completely some people would lose that sense of nature to hunt. Hunting is people who kill
animals for food, clothing, or sport. In 2011 13.7 million people, 6% of the U.S. population 16 years
old and older, hunted. Big game like elk, deer and wild...show more content...
This is the main reason why the government should not take away our guns, we have the right to
have guns to prevent us from getting hurt by people with weapons. The government made this a
law back in 1791, so almost 230 years ago this law was here in our great country of the United States
of America. This is our right and it should be here to stay.
Allowing the government to have power over gun control is a careless mistake, we use guns for
many things including the loss of tradition of hunting, not being able to protect ourselves, and
simply because of the second amendment. Owning a gun is a privilege just as much as a right so
people should definitely use it responsibly. If people can not use it right then they should not own
one, but everyone should be allowed or given the

Gun Control
With all these mass shootings happening recently in our country it has brought up a huge
discussion on if guns should be legal or not. My view on guns is if you have a clean history and no
mental illness issues I have nothing wrong with someone owning a gun. Therefore I am for guns for
self defense and hunting. I think having a gun is a huge responsibility and you shouldn't be able to
have any history of being a criminal or have a history of having a mental illness even to the slightest
degree. These mass shooters I 100% think that they had a mental illness and sent them over the edge
because I don't know how anyone in the right mind could do a crime as big as killing hundreds of
innocent people for no reason. My view on the 2nd amendment is that it should be a thing and I'm
for it. I do think that it should be harder to buy guns and something needs to change but after it's
all said and done you should be able to own guns. I think having an automatic gun should be
extremely illegal and if you get caught having a automatic gun you should serve a pretty big
sentence for your crime. Our own soldiers in the military don't even walk around with automatic
guns so absolutely nobody should be able to even own them in our country as a citizen. In the
two cases we researched and talked about I think the two citizens that won the cases ( McDonald
and Heller) should have won the cases. I think they should've won because they both had great
reasons to why owning a gun is necessary. Heller is a cop and I would definitely want a gun at
home to protect myself because what if someone you arrested 4 years ago was after you and tried
attacking your home? I think he had a good view and good points on why he should own a gun.
McDonald had criminals breaking into his garage and a lot of violence happening in his
neighborhood and no citizen deserves to be at risk and McDonald has the right to defend himself in
such a hostile environment. If I was the Supreme Court and had to explain the 2nd amendment or
the right to bear arms on these two cases I would simply say every citizen has the right to protect
themselves and if you have the clean history to own a gun than nothing is wrong with that. Crime
happens

Argumentative Essay Against Gun Control
Gun Control
Guns have always been a large part of the American culture, and are becoming a more controversial
topic due to recent incidents. Over the past century gun problem has been a considerable debate in
the United States. Guns are too easily accessible, they should either be restricted or strictly
regulated. Guns also allow people to commit suicide. Another problem why gun contol should be
imposed is to protect women from domestic abuse. Yes, the II Amendment says ''A well regulated
militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to bear arms, shall not
be infringed''. The intention of this amendment was to protect the right of militias to bear arms, not
the right of individuals. Guns supporters love to cite and twist the 2 Amendment for their own
convenience and justify the right to carry a weapon. Along the way, conservatives has shifted the
meaning of the 2 Amendment to justify any inidividuals own a weapon easily. Guns control are
easily accessible because the laws aren't working hard enough as they should. Citizens with mental
illness, criminals can easily obtaiqn a gun. Although majority of gun owners are responsible and
aware of the potential harm guns can make, there should be stricter tests in order to gauge the
eligibility of an individual to own guns in order to avoid legal purchase of guns for harmful
intentions. While mass shooting tragedies in Las Vegas, and many other terrorist attacks getting
innocent people killed, the reality is; murder and gun abuse is becoming almost routine. Where do
the gun are coming from?. In the mid–to late 1990 a wave of high–profile mass shooting incidents in
work places and school occurred most. Gun control is not a way of deprive us from our freedom, it
can save thousands of lives. With this being said, there's too many deaths that could've being
avoided. United Nations data collected by Simon Rogers for the guardian, shows that; restricting the
purchase of guns can be important in order to prevent suicides. Guns allow people to commit suicide.
America is the country with more gun–related homicides in comparison with other developed
countries because Americans own a large amount of gun. In countries where they have

An Argument Against Gun Control Essay
A proposed federal law to outlaw all guns would be more effective at disarming
law–abiding citizens than at disarming the criminals who abuse them. If guns were
outlawed, the criminals would not stop carrying guns, but the good, law–abiding citizens
would. It would do nothing about the illegally obtained handguns in the possession of
criminals. In The NRA is Right, Josh Sugarmann states that "One tenet of the National
Rifle Association's faith has always been that handgun controls do little to stop criminals
from obtaining handguns" (Sugarmann 185). Criminals simply aren't discouraged, they
just ignore bans. The only two things passing a law of this nature would accomplish
would be to take away the honest...show more content...
If a student makes an error in
their writing, do we blame the pencil they use to write? Highly unlikely. Gun control
would not prevent criminals from obtaining guns. In The NRA is Right, Sugarmann
argues " The black market that has fed off the legal sale of handguns would continue for
a long while" (Sugarmann 190). Most criminals get guns through informal off–the–record
swaps, purchases and trades with relatives, friends, drug–dealers, or other street sources.
Spending millions of dollars on a fail proof checking system would cause felons to stop
buying guns from a shop, and send them to buy their weapons from the streets.
Guns are effective forms of self–defense. Taking them away would leave civilians
defenseless and easy targets. Guns, when stored and operated correctly and safely can
create a sense of safety. When used for protection, guns provide a psychological buffer
against the fear of crime. When protected by a gun, people often feel safer because if

something should arise they have some sort of security. Criminals will avoid situations
where there is a possibility that their target may be armed. Guns can save a potential
victim from becoming one. Victims who use guns for protection are less likely to be
attacked or injured than victims who respond in any other way. Since guns empower the
weak against the strong, and because victims are generally weaker than

Gun control in the United States is a very controversial topic in today's political society, leaving the
nation divided into two sides with two strongly opinionated beliefs. This all started with the increase
in the amount of mass shootings and an overall increase in gun violence. The two sides consist of
the liberal point of view and the conservative point of view. The liberals believe that the availability
of firearms to the people in the country is a major issue, and that the U.S. government is at fault for
the mass shootings due to the lenient regulations on guns. In retaliation, the conservatives argue that
having a gun is a God given right, that the Second Amendment of The Constitution. Although the
availability of guns is seen to be...show more content...
has a sin tax on harmful substances such as cigarettes and alcohol, so why are there none on gun
regulation? Putting a tax on the price of guns could potentially decrease the overall percentage of
purchase of guns. In the U.S. simple regulated background checks are required by licensed firearm
dealers, yet there is no mandatory check when exchanging a weapon privately, while in other
countries such as Canada background checks are mandatory across all firearm exchanges and focus
on the buyer's mental health and addiction history. The United States could learn how to keep citizens
safer by examining other areas' regulations. "California has America's strictest gun laws. This means
that prospective gun owners must hold a Firearms Safety Certificate, submit to a waiting period like
in Canada, buy weapons only through licensed dealers, and possess only a 'California legal' gun that
complies with restrictions on what can and cannot be sold inside the state." (https:/
/www.nationalobserver.com/2015/12/04/news
/how–american–gun–deaths–and–gun–laws–compare–canadas). Compared to Canada's gun laws
these are seen as fairly lenient. According to the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics,
California is on the lower end of the spectrum when it comes to gun violence per capita, evidence
shows that (as of 2014) California's death rate is 7.4 per 100,000 people, compared to a much
smaller state with lenient gun

Persuasive Essay Against Gun Control
Against gun control
Whenever people hear the word guns in any sentence, there frighten by the idea it can kill anyone,
but it reality it can also save us from certain death ourselves. Gun were made to protect us, guns
don't kill people people kill people and it's one the common mistake people make when it comes to
decided to add gun control or not. They are part of the United States amendments and they are the
reason why we all are protected in our society. Without guns to protect us, people can step on us and
take over our city and even the country itself without protection.People has the mind to believe that
gun kills when in reality people kills people which is why i am against gun control.
One of the reason why we get the idea to protect ourselves with guns goes way back to the american
revolution. The American Revolution began in a dispute over gun control when British Redcoats
marched toward Lexington and Concord to disarm farmers there.we had so many wars and we
finally won and separated from the British. We must, therefore, hold onto our guns legally or
illegally for the very same reason the colonists did.
Gun prohibition may sound like a good thing to control over who can use guns but sometimes gun
prohibition can be sexist.Police and society expects women to resist rape by using their fists,
fingernails, keyrings, and scream for help, But why does any women must protect them self that
way? In 2000 and until now,there have been about 75% of rapes in California that looks very
serious and it questions us how are any women are supposed to protect themselves that way.There
is a best solution to solve all this and the best way is to own a gun. We should buy a gun and learn to
use it and the reason why women are more likely to be raped or assaulted or robbed is because many
believe that women are weak and scared enough to go and beg the State for protection. A woman
who stands proud, armed, and fearless will be able to scare anyone who tries to hurt us in any way
possible.
We have rights to own our guns, There are bad people in this country splitting us away from our
families and killing them and there are rapist out there. We need protection wherever we go.Cops are
not gonna stand next to us

Gun control in the United States has been one of the most controversy topics this year. For some
they find it unnecessary to even have a law against it but in my opinion it is very necessary for
society today. Yes, I know some will argue that restrictions for gun restrictions are "unconstitutional"
since the second amendment states that all citizens have rights to bear to arms. An excerpt from
ProCon.org explains that,"Michael Waldman, JD, President of the Brennan Center for Justice at the
New York University School of Law, stated there is nothing about an individual right to bear arms in
the notes about the Second Amendment when it was being drafted, discussed, or ratified; the US
Supreme Court declined to rule in favor of the individual right

Gun Control In discussion of gun control, one controversial belief has been that banning certain
guns, ammo, and clips will reduce the amount of crime involving guns. On one hand, liberals
argue that this will decrease the amount of crimes because there are less guns out there. On the
other hand, conservatives contend that this is not true. Some even believe that crime might
increase due to this. My own view is that banning these items will have a negative impact on our
society, and here is why. The first reason that I don't think it would have a positive effect is
because criminals don't obey the law anyway so why would this change their availability of
firearms? Just because drugs are illegal doesn't mean one still can't obtain them, so how would
this be any different with firearms? One could buy pretty much anything their heart desires on
the black market, including human body parts, and many kinds of drugs. "Mexico has some of
the strictest gun control laws in the world and yet, in 2012, Mexico had 11,309 gun murders
(9.97 gun homicides per 100,000 people) compared to the United States that had 9,146 gun
homicides (2.97 per 100,000 people)" (should more gun control laws be enacted). With that being
said, how come some believe that we should have more strict gun laws simply because other
countries do, are we striving to be like Mexico, one might hope not. One could buy pretty much
anything their heart desires on the black market, including human body parts, and many kinds of
drugs. Making firearms illegal would not help solve anything, in fact I think it would make matters
worse. The effects of the government banning guns could lead to a crisis in America because it
would take away law abiding gun owner's protection. "The October 2015 Gallup survey showed a
higher rate of 43 percent, including guns kept on property outside the home" (Ingraham). 43 percent
of Americans are gunowners that would suffer from the government banning guns; people that could
potentially use these for self–defense in the occurrence of a robbery or assault. According to
gunowners.org: Guns used 2.5 million times a year in self–defense. Law–abiding citizens use guns
to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times

The Problem with Guns
The idea and practice of "gun–control" is needs to change. The mass shootings around the nation
show that gun violence in the United States of America is an epidemic. To battle the carnage, to keep
our children and citizenry safe, some jurisdictions, schools, and public venues have enacted
"gun–free" zones and advocated restricting gun ownership. Columbine High School was a gun–free
zone. Virginia Tech? Gun free. Cinemark Theater, Aurora, Colorado, Sandy Hook Elementary, and
the Pulse Nightclub, they were all "gun–free" zones. The baseball field where the shooting took
place this month, just south of our nation's capital, has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the
nation. Gun control measures as practiced by most jurisdictions–i.e. "gun–free zones," an act
imposed by the government upon the people in an effort to change behavior–an effort working from
the outside in have failed. Notwithstanding the intent, these laws do nothing to empower or protect
law abiding citizens. Furthermore, keeping law abiding citizens from being able to defend, protect,
and save themselves is irresponsible as it is horrific.
Statistics show compared to other nations, the United States has the highest gun ownership rate–112
firearms per 100 civilians. 1 These numbers make it seem that there is an overabundance of firearms
in the U.S. To protect the citizens it might make sense, as some proponents advocate, to restrict gun
ownership to a few. This hasn't worked

Persuasive Speech: Against Gun Control Essay
Specific Purpose Statement: To persuade my audience that each individual must take responsibility
for his or her own actions. The must not blame guns for problems caused by people. .
. Attention Grabber: Gun control isn't about guns, its about control .
Body of Speech .
I'd like to read a quote by our 3rd president Thomas Jefferson. "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms
disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make...show
more content...
Many times an over zealous government takes actions that cannot be justified. A good example of
this is the Ruby Ridge Incident, where a mans wife and son were killed over a minor firearm
offense. Some States have enacted their own laws. Florida has allowed its citizens to carry a
concealed weapon. Since this law was enacted the murder rate has dropped by 29%. Over the same
period of time the nationwide murder rate increased by 11%. This clearly shows that guns in the
hands of law–abiding citizens can prevent crime. In contrast many of our countries major cities
have banned all guns. In 1976 guns were banned in Washington DC. Since then the murder rate
has risen 400%. According to a CBS poll, 64% of Americans rightfully understand and don't
believe gun control laws reduce crime anyway. History has proven that every nation, which has
disarmed its citizenry, has ended up with a dictator, a police state, and with countless horrible
atrocities. It is true that we either learn from history or history will repeat itself. Personal
Protection Not only is it our right to own guns for protection against a overbearing government, but
also against those who intend to infringe on the peoples security. The criminals don't care about
gun control laws for themselves. Actually, they are hoping for more laws will pass for gun control.
It makes breaking the law safer and easier for them. A common belief is that people don't need guns
because we have the

An Argument Against Gun Control Essay
The Gun Control issue has sparked major controversy in America today. People who support gun
control feel that guns are the reason for the soaring crime rate in our country. I disagree with the
supporters of gun control. I feel that because of the black market, violent criminals being released
from prison early, and the need to ensure personal safety, stricter gun control will have very little
impact on violent crime in America.
I believe that gun control works in theory, but not in real life. Sure, there are many violent crimes
where guns are used, but most of these guns are obtained illegally, because the gun control laws
enforced are not enough.
With the growing gun–related crime rate in the United States today, many bills have...show more
content...
It also prohibited dealers from selling handguns out of state, and out–of–state residents from buying
handguns (Bender 51). These have not eliminated gun–related crime either.
A majority of the American people feel that gun control laws will help reduce crime rates because
the waiting period would allow time for a person's temper to cool down. They also feel that gun
control will prevent repeat offenders because when a person tries to purchase a handgun, he will
have to fill out a lengthy questionnaire. The questionnaire will include questions about the buyer's
past, for example, if they have a criminal record or a record of any mental illness. If there is a
criminal record in that person's history, he will not be able to make the purchase. Restricting
handgun ownership would also reduce crime, because guns are used most often in robberies and
murders (Mayer 28). They are very easily concealed under a coat, or even in the waistband of pants.
The problem with statements like the above is that people are forgetting about the black market. If a
person is planning on buying a handgun for criminal purposes, he is not likely to buy it through a
dealer. If he buys a gun through a dealer, the gun has to be registered in that person's name. If the
gun is used in any crime or murder where a shot is fired and the gun is left behind, the police could
very easily trace the gun to that person.

Argumentative Essay Against Gun Control
Abstract
What cause crime? Is is an individual's access to firearms or is it their willingness to act illegally
given the opportunity? In this argumentative essay I will be discussing one of the most debated
topics in the United States today, gun control. There are two extremely opposite views on this topic:
the belief that guns enable crime, and the belief that guns deter crime. These polar opposites leave
room for a very good discussion of what facts and truths may lie behind this topic. Throughout this
essay I will be analyzing both sides of this issue.The significance of a topic such as gun control is
very prevalent in today's society. Some see it sad that we must argue over one of our supposedly
deemed unalienable rights such as bearing a firearm.
Over two centuries ago with the ratification of our Bill of Rights, I would highly doubt anyone
would believe that the ability to carry a firearm would one day be debated; or even illegal. As the
second amendment states "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed"
(Staff). Since 1787, nowhere has "the right to bear arms" been further explained in a legal or
political sense. Thus, throughout the history of our country the right to own a firearm has been
implied.
The side of this debate that attempts to get technical and say that guns were only needed to form
militias, is inadvertently implying the right of gun ownership themselves. For militias are armies of
citizens not involved with the

Chance Pressley
Mrs. Gallos
English 3
21 November 2017
Gun Control
The topic of gun control is a a very talked about and subjective topic and has many different
opinions and various extremes. First off, gun control can mean anything from having background
checks or waiting periods when buying guns to taking away guns completely. Most people agree
that background checks are necessary to keep guns out of people with bad intentions hands because a
gun itself is a very neutral object and can be used for any amount of good or bad as can any other
object. However, it is much easier for a person with bad intent to hurt more people with a gun then
say a stick or another neutral object. The danger of a weapon is completely up to the person in
control of the weapon.
The first argument of people in favor of gun control is, of course, If people don't have guns, they
can't kill people (or as many people). This makes sense because most mass mass killings and
murders are a result of a person with bad intent gaining possession of a gun. However, would a
stricter gun policy really help? People against gun control think not. There are various subjective
arguments but the facts are simple, the correlation between accessibility of guns and crime with
guns, if any, is that the less accessible the guns are the higher the gun violence is. This is made
very clear with studies from other countries who have very strict gun control policies. Which only
brings us back to the idea that guns are just neutral objects and can only be controlled by the person
in possession of the weapon.
One major problem that those against gun control have is that having guns is a right to every
American Citizen listed in the Second Amendment. "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"
("Second Amendment"). This is one of the major obstacles of those in a favor of gun control and a
key point in the argument of those against gun control. This is argued subjectively by those in favor
of gun control with saying that times have changed and guns are no longer needed in today's
society. However, as long as the Second Amendment is in place, guns will be legal.

Against Gun Control Essay
"You won't get gun control by disarming law–abiding citizens. There is only one way to get real gun
control: Disarm the thugs and the criminals, lock them up and if you actually don't throw the key, at
least lose it for a long time....It's a nasty truth ,but those who seek to inflict harm are not fazed with
gun controllers."– Ronald Reagen. Limiting gun ownership to mentally stable, law abiding citizens
will do nothing positive for this country. Mr.Reagen couldn't have said it any better in that quote.
I have researched this subject of limiting gun control for a couple of days now from both points of
view. I can understand why people would want gun control. I could see that less guns in the
country would prevent less shootings and terrorist attacks.like it or not the guns will still be out
there legally or illegally. If you took every legal gun there would only be illegal guns in the hands
of the criminals. Neither sides of this controversy are thinking illogically, we both want this country
to be safe.
If full gun control was passed and that all legal guns have been repealed by the government.
Law–abiding citizens are now more vulnerable than a pig swimming in a shark tank. But, you know
who will still have the guns are the criminals and thugs.They may not have them legally but they will
still...show more content...
You may not know if a shooting, robbery, or worse were to happen to you or your loved ones.
Police won't be able to respond immediately, so in that mean time you are in danger and unable to
protect yourself or others. Criminals, thugs, and terrorists only bring chaos to this country, and they
are armed with military grade weaponry. If they are armed with these weapons, why would you
limit weaponry to the citizens at the end of the barrell. If you are going to take someone's guns take
theirs. We are all just trying to defend ourselves and this great country from monsters like

Gun Control For many years the controversial topic of gun control has sparked countless
passionate debates. The arguments posed in these debates vary widely concerning the possible
solutions to solving the problem of violent crime due to the possession of firearms. This paper
introduces three different views concerning gun control. The first illustrates the freedom to own
firearms. The second view advocates the complete restriction of firearms owned by citizens, and
the last one presents a modified freedom of possessing firearms. Each faction seeks to have its
position supported by national legislation. One of the big supporters of owning firearms is The
Future of Freedom Foundation, known as FFF, who wants the absolute right to own any weapon.
Their reasoning is that people in America can only protect themselves from stronger dangers if
they own firearms. They point out that weak people like women on the street can defend
themselves against an attacker, and fewer hostage situations would happen when people in
America can carry guns with them. People of FFF freely say that more guns equals less crime,
and that in some of the states where gun ownership is not highly controlled, lower crime rate is
experienced. (Benedict D. LaRosa, October, 2002) Their argument is that after the government
passed a gun control act in 1968, the crime rate climbed up in robbery cases from 138,000 in 1965
to 376,000 in 1972, while murders with guns increased from 5,015 to 10,379 in the same period
according to the Census Bureau. They cite an example about New York, where the restrictions on
guns are strong; the crime rate is higher than in Vermont, where gun controls are low. Also, they
state where gun control is strictly enforced, illegal gun ownership is much higher. By allowing
guns for citizens, the crime rate will decrease. They also considered this an economical solution for
protection. (Benedict D. LaRosa) They support multiple gun ownership for each person so they can
be safe on the street, in the office and even at home. They say gun control interferes with the right to
protect yourself and your family. They attack the government by saying that the right to own
firearms is being taken away slowly from citizens, and

Persuasive Essay On Anti Gun Control
As you and your family walk through the store, a man dressed all in black walks in and pulls out
an assault rifle and starts firing. People fall to the ground, including your mother, killed by the
raging bullets. You and your surviving family hide, hoping to not be seen by the gunman. By this
time the Police have arrived, ending the carnage. You were lucky, although others were not. Reports
later prove this man was mentally ill and was able to acquire weapons without questioning. How
could this of happened to your family and countless other families? The answer is the lack of gun
control. Pro Gun Control advocates want guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill,
while Anti Gun Control advocates say gun control impedes...show more content...
By the year end the total number of victims could be 11,700. Too many criminals and mentally ill
people have guns. "1 out of 5 guns are still sold without a background check (Brady Campaign, Key
Gun Violence Statistics)". Guns are still getting into the hands of criminals and the mentally ill.
Weapons in the hands of these people cause massacres. Furthermore, weapons such as the AR–15
and AK–47 were developed for war. Developed to inflict maximum amount of casualties in little
amount of time. Something that is overkill for protection or hunting. As Ronald Reagan states "An
AK–47 in not a sporting weapon, nor needed for defense of a home (Snopes, Arms Talks)". Reagan
didn't want to take the 2nd Amendment away from people, but to make the purchase of a weapon
harder. An AR–15 fires 45 rounds a minute, which is way too excessive for hunting and protection.
As well the AR–15 hold 30 rounds of ammunition, which is way too much for hunting or protection.
A trained marksman only needs one bullet.. According to Gun Rights Activists, gun control is
infringing on the 2nd Amendment. Gun control is limiting their right to own and carry guns.
Nobody wants their rights taken away from them. However, gun control only wants to control the
gun ownership of criminals and the mentally ill, not responsible gun owners. Criminals and the
mentally ill are the ones committing these horrific massacres, not

Gun control has been a controversial topic for 2 years now. Due to very recent events such as the
shooting in San Bernardino, the need for strict gun control could not be more emphasized by the
public. According to, preventioninstitute.org, eighty–nine individuals die because of shootings in the
United States every day. Easy access guns are resulting to many counts of gun violence, which is
why stricter laws need to be put into place. The current state of affairs is inadmissible and something
needs to be done immediately to prevent fewer deaths. Forming a culture of gun safety, having
accessible mental health treatment, and having sensible gun laws are all semi–solutions to the major
issue at hand.
The United States is the nation that has the

Essay on An Argument Against Gun Control
Argument Against Gun Control
An Argument Against Gun Control As long ago as 1789, the creators of the Constitution realized the
importance of guns in American society. The Second Amendment states,"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." No loopholes, or legal caches exist in this statement. The Founding Fathers allow for
no restriction of the private ownership of firearms. Yet, in recent years anti–gun politicians have
attempted to control guns in the name of crime prevention. Gun control makes no effort to control
criminals, does not reduce crime, takes guns from responsible sportsmen and...show more content...
Ultimately, people's choices lead them to drive recklessly, overindulge in unhealthy food, and use
firearms to commit violent crimes. So, criminals should be controlled, not the guns which they share
with millions of law–abiding citizens. Gun control supporters claim that gun control lowers crime
rate. Gun control does nothing to reduce crime. A study conducted by the Urban Institute regarding
The Clinton Gun Ban Law of 1995, finds that "because the banned guns and magazines were never
used in more than a fraction of all gun murders, even the maximum theoretically achievable
preventive effect of the ban on gun murders is almost certainly too small to detect statistically..."
Joseph Constance, the Deputy Police Chief of Trenton, New Jersey, states: "Assault weapons are
used in an underwhelming .026 of 1% of crimes in New Jersey. This means that my officers are
more likely to confront an escaped tiger from the local zoo, than to confront an assault rifle in the
hands of a drug–crazed killer on the streets." West Virginia stands as an example of the inaccurate
thinking of gun control advocates. This state has the highest number of guns per person in the
nation, yet it has the lowest number of crimes per person in the nation.
Gun control has little or no effect on crime. Gun control advocates believe that

Essay Against Gun Control
The fight for strict gun control is a big problem for the honest American since guns are a big need
for self defense, criminals will always get their guns illegally, and the right to bear arms is a
constitutional right. Americans and people all over the world need some kind of self defense like
a gun to show the aggressor where you stand. A woman named Sonya Dowdy was at the post
office when a man tried to rob her when she pulled her gun out he fled the scene, if it was not for
her having that handgun he would have robbed her and very well possibly hurt her
(Currie–McGhee, L.K.). In Sonya's case she was able to defend herself, but she also could have
helped someone else if they were the ones getting robbed, the only thing that can stop bad people is
good people. Carrying a firearm can help with the number of woman raped, fewer humans killed,
and less neighbourhoods vandalized (The Right to Bear Arms is a Human Right).
When everyone starts shouting that they need gun control they need to stop and realize that only
around three percent of gun violence crimes are actually committed by someone who has purchased
the gun they are using legally, that means that the other ninety seven percent are using firearms that
are used in crimes are not obtained the right way like every law abiding citizen that wants to or does
carry a gun (Snyder, Michael). Criminals are not going to just turn in their guns when the
government and people try to enforce gun control, the only thing that will do

Essays Against Gun Control

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

Más de Paper Writing Service Superiorpapers

Más de Paper Writing Service Superiorpapers (20)

Último

Último (20)

Essays Against Gun Control