A634.8.3.RB
Gun
Control: What is the Answer?
After
spending almost three decades in the U.S. Army I am very pro-gun. I believe that every American has a right to
bear arms. Don’t get me wrong, there
should some restrictions. Convicted
felons, violent offenders, committers of domestic violence, and those who have
mental incapacitations should not be allowed to possess a firearm.
According
to LaFollette (2007, pg. 180), “Most defenders of private gun ownership claim
we have a moral right – as well as a constitutional one – and that this is not
an ordinary right, but a fundamental one…What makes a right fundamental? A fundamental right is a non-derivative right
protecting a fundamental interest.”
So,
is bearing arms a fundamental right? I
would conclude that it is. The Constitution
of the United States grants us this right.
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.” (Legal
Information Institute, n.d.). However,
it is my opinion that it needs to be coupled with the Fourteenth Amendment to
really understand it. The Fourteenth
Amendment states, in part, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States,
and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and
of the state wherein they reside. No
state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or
immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any
person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to
any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
(Legal Information Institute, n.d.).
There
are those that would disagree with a citizen’s right to bear arms regardless of
constitutional right. They believe that
certain types of firearms should not be owned by private citizens at all. They often refer to these firearms as assault
rifles and long guns. The wish to
restrict magazine size absolutely restrict semi-automatic firearms. Their argument is fueled by mass shootings
that have occurred in the United States.
Their rational is by restricting these items will decrease violent
crimes and murder. They believe that is
guns that do harm. According to
LaFollette (2007, pg. 183), “We must be careful when we say that guns cause
harm. Guns kill people because agents
use them to kill people (or misuse them in ways that cause people to be
killed). As the National Rifle
Association (NRA) puts it: ‘Guns don’t kill people, people do’.” Moreover, according
to ProCon.org (2016), “The United States has 88.8 guns per 100 people, or about
270,000,000 guns, which is the highest total and per capita number in the
world. 22% of Americans own one or more guns (35% of men and 12% of women).
America's pervasive gun culture stems in part from its colonial history,
revolutionary roots, frontier expansion, and the Second Amendment…
Largely,
the current public gun control debate in the United States occurs after a major
mass shooting. There were at least 126 mass shootings between Jan. 2000 and
July 2014. Proponents of more gun control often want more laws to try to
prevent the mass shootings and call for smart gun laws, background checks, and
more protections against the mentally ill buying guns. Opponents of more gun
laws accuse proponents of using a tragedy to further a lost cause, stating that
more laws would not have prevented the shootings. A Dec. 10, 2014 Pew Research
Center survey found 52% of Americans believe the right to own guns should be
protected while 46% believe gun ownership should be controlled, a switch from
1993 when 34% wanted gun rights protected and 57% wanted gun ownership
controlled.” My argument is that the
ordinary citizen is not the one using guns to cause harm. The 22% of Americans that own guns do so
legally. They use these guns for
recreation (shooting practice), hunting, and for defense. They take gun safety classes and secure their
guns properly at home by having locked gun safes, trigger locks and keeping the
ammunition in a separate place.
So
what is the answer? I would say we need to keep guns out of the hands of
criminals. However, even with gun
control, criminals are still able to obtain guns…mostly through illegal
channels. Pro-gun individuals would
argue more than just this fact. According
to “The Crux” (2017), there are ten best arguments against gun control and they
are:
10. There’s still murder in countries where handguns
are banned.
9. Limiting assault rifles limits your Second
Amendment rights.
8. The Second Amendment is not intended for just
ordinary home defense.
7. Armed civilians help take out the bad guys.
6. Shooters will get access to a gun, even with strict
gun laws in place.
5. Gun rights will protect you from a police state.
4. Rampage shooters like soft targets.
3. Prohibition didn’t stop alcohol… gun control won’t
stop guns.
2. Laws don’t apply to criminals.
1. The world isn’t perfect…
References
Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). Second
Amendment. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/second_amendment
LaFollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing
ProCon.org. (2016, February 18). Background of the Issue: "Should More
Gun Control Laws Be Enacted?” Retrieved from http://gun-control.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=006436
“The Crux”. (2017). If you believe in "gun control," this is probably not for
you... Retrieved from http://thecrux.com/ten-powerful-arguments-against-gun-control/
No comments:
Post a Comment