Academic Master

English

strict gun control laws intervention to control crime and violence

Thesis statement: As gun ownership promotes crimes, strict gun control laws are an effective intervention to control crime and violence.

The Australian model of strict gun control laws sets a guiding framework for countries like America to control gun use. Americans encounter more shooting incidents due to ineffective gun laws and regulations. The consistent rise in mass public shootings exhibits a need for a dramatic shift in gun control policing and laws. The argument states that more guns have a direct relationship with crimes. Weak gun control laws are inadequate in controlling mass shootings taking place in America. Reduction in the rate of gun ownership can be a useful strategy in controlling crimes. The increase in crime rates in Chicago, including 726 murders in 2016 compared to previous years’ 496 murders, reflects the flaws of the gun laws. The FBI reports that the rate of murders increased significantly in America, depicting the need for policy change. Murder rates are high in Texas, Florida, Indiana, Illinois, South Carolina, Ohio, Baltimore and Pennsylvania. Gun ownership poses high risks of homicide, reflecting weaknesses of gun policing (Bismarck).

Australian model suggests that declining gun ownership leads to reduced homicides. Strict gun control laws adopted by Australia in 1996 resulted in a 59% decline in homicides. The dramatic decline in homicides and murders suggests the effectiveness of gun control laws. Limiting access to guns and restricted ownership would provide less opportunity to indulge in acts of violence or crimes. Younge identifies the flawed gun policy, “people who have a gun in the house are far more likely to be shot dead than those who don’t” (Younge). Having guns at home does not add to the safety of the households. Australia managed to bring homicides down after limiting the sale and purchase of guns. The limited or no availability of guns allows the opportunity to use them, which adds to the enhanced security of the citizens. Removing the freedom to buy guns resulted in increased security that confers the proposition of adopting strict gun control laws. America failed to decline gun-related crimes due to the absence of strict laws as incorporated bythe  Australian state.

The myth that guns make Americans safe is flawed,d as access to guns creates opportunities for crime. The argument claims that access to guns motivates citizens to use guns in situations that lead to violence. If guns are unavailable, citizens would be safer due to the absence of opportunity. If guns would make people safe, then America would be the country with the lowest crime rates. Facts reveal that America is not the safest place as the citizens are vulnerable to increased homicides and violent incidents. On average, seven people die due to gunshots and homicides, reflecting the negative impacts of gun ownership. The fact that people e can freely buy guns and the absence of the state initiative in controlling their use reflects a need for strict gun control laws. The association of guns with mass killings depicts the state’s ignorance of preventing deaths from occurring due to guns. Making buying easy allows more people to carry guns, which makes citizens unsafe. With more guns, citizens have the opportunity to use them, increasing the chances of misuse. The argument emphasizes the adverse impacts of free gun availability, as citizens are more likely to use it when they lose control in fights. The claims state that the myth of relating guns to personal safety is ineffective as guns do not add to safety but increase vulnerability.

The claims of background checks exhibit flaw,s making the preventions inadequate for controlling murders and shootings. Background checks for gun buyers depict near-unanimity at 94 percent. Facts reveal that FBI background checks lack evidence on millions of buyers, reflecting the flaws of gun control policing. The failure of government agencies to maintain records efficiently and maintain information on the majority of gun owners uncovers the possible measures to prevent possibilities of shootings. NRA presents the reasons for improper records as the high costs of systems. FBI mentions, “National Rifle Association says about 7 million records are absent from the system, based on a 2013 report by the nonprofit National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics” (Somashekhar, Horton, and Barrett). The facts also indicate that many felony convictions are missing due to limitations of background checks. FBI identifies that 25% of felony convictions are without records. Irrespective of the background check, the masses are able to buy guns and conceal accurate information that leads to further crimes. The background checks thus fail to inform the legal agencies about the threats reflecting weaknesses of gun laws. The evidence disclosed by the FBI also depicts that the gun holders engaged in domestic violence and misuse of guns do not exist in the database. The claim supports the main argument that strict gun control laws in the states ease the safety of citizens. State’s reliance on the background security checks fails to justify the free availability of guns.

Assault weapons do not necessarily lead to self-defense. The claim that the availability of guns at his does not ensure that the holder is using them for self-defense. No evidence proves that the owners of guns use weapons only for personal protection. Banning assault weapons provides a solution to control gun crimes. People who need weapons for self-defense would buy a short gun, not an assault weapon. The argument claims that the state’s reason for allowing gun ownership for self-protection is vague because assault weapons are not necessary for self-protection. Joe Biden supports the claim, “a shotgun will keep you a lot safer, a double-barrelled shotgun, than the assault weapon in somebody’s hands who doesn’t know how to use it, even one who does know how to use it” (Walker). Banning assault weapons would not deprive people of self-protection, but it would help the state to overcome the problem of increased homicides and mass shootings. Banning assault weapons is also part of strict gun control laws that limit the access of citizens to a dangerous weapon and enhance the protection of its people.

Without strict gun control laws, the government is unable to maintain law and order, which threatens the lives of people. The claim supports the main argument as it highlights the influence of free guns on the state’s role. The state is unable to control crime and terror when the citizens are gun owners. Elimination of citizens’ independence to buy guns would increase the enforcement agencies and provision of increased protection to the people. The number of incidents taking place in America increased by 7.2 percent, indicating a prevalence of weak law and order. To attain peace, the state needs to restrict gun ownership. Fragile law and order situation exhibits enhancing gun laws (Williams).

America faces a crucial problem of gun violence and shootings, indicating ineffective policing and the role of law enforcement agencies. The evidence highlighted in the discussion reveals that America needs strict gun control laws that limit the buying of guns. The myth that guns add to personal safety is invalid, as the number of gun incidents increased massively in America. People do not need assault weapons for self-defense, also the availability of guns does not ensure that the owners use them for personal protection only. The claim that having more access to guns promotes crimes provides justification for the main argument.

Work Cited

Walker, Hunter. Weapons Aren’t Necessary for Self-Defense. 2013. 24 03 2018 <http://observer.com/2013/01/joe-biden-explains-why-assault-weapons-arent-necessary-for-self-defense/>.

Williams, Timothy. Violent Crime in U.S. Rises for Second Consecutive Year. 2017. 25 03 2018 <https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/25/us/violent-crime-murder-chicago-increase-.html?mtrref=www.google.com.pk&gwh=D5EDC5EB9DD099F0AD331F4C29B9B88D&gwt=pay>.

Younge, Gray. Why Americans won’t give up their guns. 2017. 25 03 2018 <https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/06/americans-guns-nra-las-vegas-shooting>.

Bismarck. The 30 cities with the highest murder rates in the US. 2017. 25 03 2018 <http://bismarcktribune.com/news/national/the-cities-with-the-highest-murder-rates-in-the-us/collection_5a789407-4d43-5403-ad56-7c47880bda8e.html#8>.

Somashekhar, Sandhya, Alex Horton, and Devlin Barrett. FBI’s gun background check system lacks records of millions of cases. 2017. 25 03 2018 <https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/fbi-gun-background-checks-missing-millions-records-america-gun-control-texas-shooting-latest-a8049706.html>

SEARCH

Top-right-side-AD-min
WHY US?

Calculate Your Order




Standard price

$310

SAVE ON YOUR FIRST ORDER!

$263.5

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

Pop-up Message