Author

Tutor

Course

Date

Gun Ownership

Introduction

Issues pertaining to security have always been controversial. This may be founded on the fact that security seems to guarantee or ensure that people enjoy all other rights. In essence, countries and individuals make enormous strides in enhancing their own security. One of the most popular ways for people to guarantee their security was securing a gun. However, questions have been raised as to the authenticity or efficacy of this option. These questions revolve around whether the advantages that come with this option outweigh the cons as to justify its authenticity. In my opinion, still controls should be implemented as to limit gun ownership.

First, gun ownership has been shown as one of the key factors that lead to the increase in crime. In essence, gun control would allow for the reduction of crime rates. Research has indicated that there exists a positive relationship between the increase in gun ownership and crime rates. Crime rates in the United States have been rising since from the 60’s through the 70’s and 80’s and peaked in the 90’s (Lauter, 4). It is worth noting that a large percentage of this crime and violence was gun-related. A study conducted in 2010 showed that there is a steep decline in the rates of crime all over the United States. In fact, the rates of crime are the lowest since 1972 (Lauter, 5). While there are a number of reasons for the sharp decline, it is noteworthy that the ownership of guns is at an all-time low. The percentage of people who own a firearm, the same weapons that are usually used in committing crimes, is 1 in every five people, which is half the percentage in the 70s (O’Neill, 27). The bottom line is that firearms are lethal weapons whose key function is killing. In essence, the fewer the people having them the better it would be for everyone (Doeden, 45). This is especially considering that a reduced prevalence of firearms in the society would reduce the possibility of guns falling in the hands of criminals (Doeden, 78).

In addition, restricting the ownership of guns would allow for proper regulation of ownership. It is worth noting that the most appropriate way of ascertaining that only suitable candidates have the capacity to acquire guns is via gun ownership control. In most cases, the process of applying for a gun license is extremely strenuous (Spitzer, 65). It also assists regulators in determining or ascertaining that the people having guns have no criminal background. In essence, the control would ensure that firearms are not given to criminals. It is worth noting that, gun control would also allow state governments to add exceptional stipulations that would increase the difficulty of obtaining firearms in the case of criminals. This is the same case for individuals with mental illness or prior gun convictions (Spitzer, 69). In addition, gun control would allow the government to restrict the nature of weapons that are available to civilians. This would lessen the number of extremely lethal weapons available to criminals and citizens in general, thereby reducing crime. Moreover, control on ownership of guns would hand gun control laws to the local and state governments (Spitzer, 76). The current laws assume a One Size Fit All concept, where all states have to allow ownership of guns even in instances where it would not be the case (O’Neill, 33). Gun control would allow local and state governments to have the capacity to decipher the best option for their own communities. Places with higher rates of crime would, more often than not, require stricter laws pertaining to gun control than the low crime areas (Valdez, 67). This would consequently allow for the elimination of the One-Size-Fit-All aspect considering that every area is unique. It would concurrently give local and state governments the capacity to tailor their laws according to their needs.

On the same note, quite a large number of accidents occurring at homes involving firearms would be eliminated. It goes without saying that most of the accidents occurring at homes and involving firearms or any nature are extremely fatal (Lott, 44). Of course, there are those who hold the opinion that it would be preferable to allow people to have guns for sport shooting and hunting (Valdez, 56). However, it goes without saying that this gun culture seems to glamorize, as well as legitimize unnecessary gun ownership. It tends to desensitize ordinary Americans as to the fatal or lethal effects pertaining to firearms and guns in general (Lott, 56).

In conclusion, debates pertaining to gun ownership seem to touch a raw nerve in the American fabric. However, it is imperative that the acquisition of any nature is controlled. This is especially considering that the primary function of guns or firearms is to cause grievous bodily harm or to kill altogether. It goes without saying that gun control would help in reducing crime rates in the country. In addition, it would allow states to tailor their laws according to their needs pertaining to security. On the same note, it would ensure that criminals, mentally ill people and people with unimpressive gun histories do not have an easy time acquiring firearms. This would also reduce the chances of fatal accidents in homes.

Works cited

Lauter, David. Crime is down — and so is gun ownership. Los Angeles Times, July 23rd 2012 retrieved October 15, 2012 from HYPERLINK “http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/23/news/la-pn-crime-is-down-and-so-is-gun-ownership-20120722” http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/23/news/la-pn-crime-is-down-and-so-is-gun-ownership-20120722

Spitzer, Robert J. The politics of gun control. New York: CQ Press, 2008

Doeden, Matt. Gun Control: Preventing Violence Or Crushing Constitutional Rights? New York: Twenty-First Century Books, 2011, Print

Valdez, Angela. Gun Control. New York: Facts On File, Incorporated, 2008. Print

Lott, John R. More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws. New York: University of Chicago Press. 2000

O’Neill, Terry. Gun Control. New York: Greenhaven Press, 2000. Print