Gun control

Insert Surname 4


Gunrights have controversial issues in various nations. In the UnitedStates, the second constitutional amendment concerns the right tobear arms. Gun rights have been a hotly debated issue in the USmostly during the election period. and rights teams havebeen for a long time, been lobbying the Congress to amendlegislations in their favor. In the past years, the issue of guncontrol has reached the highest court in the US. The Supreme CourtCase of 2008 between the District of Columbia verses Hellerauthorized the constitution to protect its citizens’ gun ownershipfor personal use. However, 5-4 decisions only favored the federal lawbut did not address laws at local and state level, (Miller11).Therefore, in July 2010, the Supreme Court ruled for the applicationof the gun bearing rights at local, state, and federal level. TheSupreme Court also lifted an approximately 30 year’s gun ban forChicago. The National Rifle Association described the ruling as alandmark, although the decision failed to specify the type of gunlaws applicable to the 2ndamendment. The paper seeks to prove the point that gun control lawsviolate self-defense rights and denies the citizens a sense ofsafety. Therefore, increased gun control laws are not needed.Education on handling guns and gun safety is crucial to preventaccidental gun deaths.

Accordingto Wayne La Pierre, the NRA vice president, getting law-abidingcitizen to access the law is a big challenge. The gun control and gunownership groups continue to lobby the Congress on the gun controlissues to either sharpen or blind the ruling. Since the country needsa well-regulated Militia, for the Free State security, people’srights to own and bear arms should not be violated. Every US citizenshould own and know how to handle weapons because guns do not killbut people kill defenseless people. Therefore, based on the idea thatguns do not kill but people kill defenseless people, gun control isunnecessary. A gun in itself is a morally natural object that whenhandled by a dangerous person becomes a problem. Therefore, it issensible to focus on the punishment of dangerous people using gunsinstead of regulating objects themselves. If a dangerous criminalslack access to guns, they will alternatively use other weapons toinjure and kill people. Therefore, the problem is not the guns butthe people handling them.

Someorganizations have various non-sequitur reasoning for control of gun.For instance, most recent Pulse Club shooting in Florida, Orlando byOmar Mateen who killed 49 people. We cannot blame the weapon but Mr.Omar. He was responsible for pulling out the trigger to kill innocentpeople as a terrorism act. Similarly, if the people in the club hadguns too, Omar would not have killed 49 people. They would havedefended themselves and may be few or none would have died.Similarly, the South California case is also another non-sequiturfallacy about gun control. Dylann Roof mercilessly killed 17 peopleat church and spared an old woman for a reason. Because he had a planof committing suicide after the incidence, he wanted the survivor totestify of the incidence. In this case, the gun is not the problemthe problem is Mr Roof who committed this despicable crime using thegun. Although, the victims were in church, if they were armed, Roofwould not have killed them. Further, in Louisiana, John Russell, a59-year-old man killed 20 people and injured 11 other in Lafayettemovie theatre using a legally purchased gun he had bought in Alabama.Sources confessed that the man had some mental problems and thisexplains why he methodologically shot people several times and latershot himself in the head. If these victims at the movie theatre werearmed, they would not have died or injured.

Therefore,despite the strict law on gun control, the US has experienced manyand even worse of similar incidents discussed above, but is guncontrol the solution? The US citizens need education on handling gunsand gun safety to prevent accidental gun deaths and defendthemselves, their families, and the entire nation (Miller13).Adolf Hitler once suggested on citizen disarmament as the way ofconquering a nation. Nevertheless, I concur with Jeff Cooper’sschool of thought, “The rifle itself lacks moral stature, becauseit does not have its own will. Therefore, gun control has more harmsthan benefits. For instance, despite strict gun laws, criminals donot obey gun laws, only the citizens who abide by the law do.Therefore, gun control is ineffective and worsens the situation forlaw-abiding people. Further, some people argue that if gun dealersand sellers are restricted from selling guns to unlicensed gunholders and dangerous people, although some may abide by the law andreduce gun access by terrorists, some dealers may ignore the law orterrorist may opt for other crude weapons. If only the criminals canabide by the laws, then gun control would be effective. Inconclusion, therefore, gun control more harms than benefits becausethere are more good men than evil one. While the latter cannot bepersuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they cancertainly be corrected or if not, the good people can use guns fortheir safety and defense.


Miller,Wilbur.&nbspTheSocial History of Crime and Punishment in America: An Encyclopedia. Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE, 2012. Internet resource.