Anti-gun Control Laws

Name 6

Anti-gunControl Laws

Thegun control debate is complex and has elicits fiery and emotionalsentiments, as well as caused bitter division in the United Statespolitical climate. According to the United States constitution, everycitizen has a basic right of to keep and own firearms and thus, thegun rights advocate have been using this argument to demonstrate thatfirearms restrictions is a violation of basic civil rights.Additionally, they cite gun control laws unconstitutional and arguethat inclusion of gun rights in the constitution was because oftyranny and imperialism incidences on the colonies where people hadbeen denied their natural and civil rights. Gun ownership byprospective victims may likely reduce violence and crime compared toreducing gun possession itself. In fact, the rate of robberies,burglary and rape might have been higher were it not the possessionof weapons by the prospective victim population, thus gun controlshould not be an answer to recently gun related issues.

Thefirst argument by the opponents of gun control is that shootersshould be held responsible for killings and not guns, because gunsare thus just mere tools. Secondly, they have pointed out thatcitizens who own arms are law-abiding citizens, who will only useguns carefully them for self-defense, target shooting, and hunting.Some researchers have conceded to the fact that annually law-abidingcitizens to defend themselves against criminals have used guns. Onthe other hand, reports show that use of concealed weapons has helpedto reduce murder, as well as crime rates in the United States. As aresult, the widespread ownership of guns means that more people ownguns for self-defense, and this would decrease gun-related deaths.According to Maggon, opponents of gun control believe that just likeowning a car where car accidents do not prevent car ownership anddriving, then accidental guns should not be treated differently(Maggon 63).

Maggonalso states that opponents of gun control have argued that criminalsavoid citizens carrying guns. Astudy by Pew Research center found that approximately 57% of citizensin the United States believe that gun ownership is necessary fortheir safety and protects them for falling as crime victims. Theyclaimthat more guns means less crime and law-abiding citizens carrying aconcealed weapon can help to respond to a threatening situation oreven prevent crime. Citizens allowed to carry concealed weapons havea license or a concealed carry permit that contain rules regardingspecific rule how those weapons should be used (Maggon 64).

Thirdly,opponents of gun control argue it may not prevent crime rates sinceillegal purchase of firearms can be very easy. In fact, criminalshave an easy access to illegal guns purchase, and banningguns ownership will foster a black market where increase crimerevenue will benefit organized criminals. Particularly, gun ownershiphas received more support from women and black population becausethey are an easy target to crime. Women and the elderly carryingfirearms can prevent rape ordeals. Americancitizens describe gun control as a costly affair that will not helpmuch since criminals have access to illegal arms and this leavescitizens defenseless. However, if a victim possesses a gun women andother weaker individuals in the society may have a way to self-defendthemselves against rape or other crimes.

Astudy by U.S National Academy of Sciences concluded that there existsno evidence that restriction of guns could reduce crime. As a matterof facts, attacks are more likely to happen in gun-free zones. Astudy by Pew Research center shows that most Americans have beenopposing to the idea of gun control for decades. However, they arenow convinced that the hypothesis more guns less crime is true.According to Gallup a majority of Americans believe that they aresafer with a firearm at home. This current opinion by Americancitizens aligns with academic research that demonstrate that having agun at home is more likely to prevent murder compared to accidentalshooting or killing loved ones. The press has given accidental gundeath too much coverage, but this may be misleading since law-abidingcitizens do not own the weapons involved in gang fight (Maggon 63).

Inhis article, Hardy argues that gun owners have a right to fightagainst gun control by the government. He argues that the sharedexperiences of gun owners lead to the rejection of gun proposal andthey cited compromise where the parties that is the government andthe gun owners, involved would make real compromised (Hardy).Alternatively, Hunter demonstrates in his article how gun controlkills. The author give an example of Connecticut shooting wherechildren were killed and no proper justice was received by theparent’s victims. Additionally, he states that lack of justicemakes the situation worse. Furthermore, the author has provided alist of national tragedies that were prevented by armed populace. Heargues that prevention of crime through use of personal firearm isbeneficial and can help avert a deadly attack. Therefore, sincearmed victims can successfully disrupt a crime then this means thatgun ownership might also hamper criminals’ efforts and discouragecrime in the first place. Additionally, in his article, hardy haveargued gun-control advocates noted that gun control laws only disarmcitizens rather that control guns since criminals can easily obtainthem in the black market (Hunter).

Insummary, the law enforcement system in America has not been able toprovide adequate public safety. Gun control opponents argue thatpreventing criminals from acquiring weapons, using law enforcementhave proved difficult. In their point of view, a more stringentregulatory system would only threaten the safety of civilians, andmore other problems. In fact, they point that low violent crime ratesin other countries depend on multiple cultural differences and notgun control. Additionally, the gun control opponents insist that gunownership is not only for recreational purposes but a way to defendone’s property and their lives. The gun control opponents haveprovided statistics how the right to own firearms have preventedattacks by nearly 2.5 million times annually. According to them,incidences of crime have been reduced by gun ownership by privatecitizens (Kleck).

Anarticle by Proletarian Revolution argue that gun control should notbe taken as a solution to the recently gun related issues. Thearticle maintains that gun control should be stopped since crime inthe society has increased as a result of “miseries of decayingcapitalism”. He argue that the ruling class in the society is thebiggest criminals since encourage misery and violence in poorcommunities. The author further argues that the United States grantedtheir citizens right to bear arms at it revolutionary origins.However, today in the era of imperialist decay, the nation tries todeny those rights to its citizens. In fact by using crime campaigns,the oppressed masses have been denied their right to defendthemselves. Furthermore, the author argues that the working classactivists have acknowledged the requirements of self-defense not onlyagainst street crimes but also against violence fostered by theruling class. To attain socialist world free form capitalism horrors,the working class should survive and fight for their rights and forstarters, defending their constitutional rights to bear arms is theanswers. However, the self defense should be organized. In summary,the author argue that the anti-gun campaign is a form of deceptionand offering incentives to big-time criminals is not a way topersuade them to put down their guns. Since the criminals know thevalue of those weapons then this strategy will only help thempurchase better weapons with the money. Finally, the working classcan only do away with criminals in the society through having anarmed defense system of the citizens (Proletarian Revolution).

Inconclusion, this paper has analyzed why gun control would not work.First, the number of privately owned firearms in America isapproximately 300 million therefore, buying all the guns would behard. In order to uphold the right of the citizens to bear arms thengun control would not work. On the other hand, the security systemhas been overwhelmed to protect citizens, and thus to minimize masscasualties in cases of terrorism and mass shootings then gunspossession by private citizens is an added advantage.


Hardy,David T. “Why Gun Owners are Right to Fight Against Gun Control.” Foundation, 18 July 2013. Web. 7 April 2015.

ProletarianRevolution. Gun Control Is No Answer to Crime. Retrieved from:

Doeden,Matt. GunControl: Preventing Violence or Crushing ConstitutionalRights?Minneapolis:Twenty-First Century Books, 2012. Print. 57

Kleck,Gary. Guns and Violence: A Summary of the Field. Tallahassee:Florida State University. Retrieved from

Hunter,jack. How Gun Control Kills, December 2012. Retrieved from: