The ongoing debate in the United States revolves around whether the Second Amendment is protecting or causing harm to the nation. The country currently has approximately 250 million firearms, almost one per person, with an annual increase of about 7 million. This raises concerns about its impact. Supporters argue that the Second Amendment, as stated in the Constitution, is both logical and lawful. According to Don B. Kates, author of Handgun Prohibition and the Original Meaning of the Second Amendment, it protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for lawful purposes such as self-defense at home while not endorsing violence or using it as a shield. However, CNN reports that due to unclear wording in the amendment, there are loopholes that can be exploited by individuals like Benjamin Ferguson who obtained a silencer classified as a Title II weapon similar to rockets and machine guns. These challenges present significant dilemmas for both citizens and government authorities in the United States.
One possible solution to tackle this issue is to create gun safety course videos targeted towards late elementary, early middle school, and early high school students. These videos would serve as a reminder that guns are not toys and highlight their potential for causing immense destruction and severe injuries. By referencing the tragic incident at Sandy Hook Elementary, the students can better comprehend the impact and harm that firearms can have.
The debate revolves around the effectiveness of these prevention actions in addressing the issues surrounding Gun Control and whether it is truly preventable. While some believe that it can be prevented, a larger majority agreeing with this belief would eliminate any argument about the problem. In his article titled “The Next Gun Fight,” Michael Schered discusses how the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting perceive the Second Amendment as not worth preserving. The article also mentions President Obama and Vice President Biden’s efforts to maintain national security while upholding rights. On the other hand, Wayne LaPiere, the Vice President of NRA, argues that there is an extensive conspiracy by Obama to dismantle the Second Amendment. Whether or not this claim holds true, LaPiere’s perspective sparks a profound debate on what people truly desire – complete removal of guns or stricter gun laws with an accompanying processing system?
Obama and Biden’s endorsement of the new gun proposals signifies their optimism towards individuals affected by previous gun incidents. However, doubts surround the actual execution of these proposals. Nevertheless, it is evident that the main issue regarding guns lies not in the firearms themselves but rather in how they are handled and the laws governing their usage. An examination of data from 1993 to 2011 has uncovered a fascinating finding: gun violence has decreased in all categories except for suicide, defying expectations of a significant increase. To responsibly tackle the complex matter of gun control, an article titled “Loop-Hole allows for easier purchase of high-powered weapons” suggests implementing a procedure involving written and verbal assessments to ensure mentally stable individuals free from untreated psychological conditions can obtain firearms. Republican Virginia Foxx supports this measure, emphasizing the importance of preventing mentally ill individuals from engaging in harmful actions while avoiding unnecessary burdens on responsible gun owners and small businesses. However, Republican Tom Price argues that our understanding of mentally ill individuals prone to causing harm may be incomplete.
There are two methods that can be used to determine if an individual has a criminal background or affiliation with gangs. One approach is conducting a background check, which can reveal previous felonies, major convictions, or current/past gang affiliations. Although both methods can be expensive, considering the high number of gun purchases in the US each year, they contribute to the country’s financial well-being.
According to Fawn Johnson’s article “Gun-Buyer Background Checks Both Effective and Politically Achievable,” background checks are effective for dealing with criminals and are supported by 95% of the general public and 74% of National Rifle Association members. Farred Zakaria’s article “Will He Fight or Compromise” further supports this information by stating that there is strong support for common-sense measures such as universal background checks favored by 85% of Americans.
Additionally, 80% support preventing individuals with mental illnesses from buying firearms while 58% and 55%, respectively, would prohibit semi-automatic and assault-style weapons. These studies collectively represent the desires of the majority of people and establish what they consider appropriate measures.
The government’s decision is the likely next source for another method, and it can be perceived as rational or irrational based on political viewpoints. Republicans prefer swift and effective measures, while Obama’s administration aims to find a solution that satisfies everyone, especially those affected by the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting who currently advocate for change. Although this approach has potential benefits, there may still be flaws in its impact. Similar to previous laws, these laws can also be violated. However, they have the ability to establish a standard that a majority of the population (approximately 83% or more) is willing to comply with. This significant percentage could result in substantial changes or further disputes depending on which side persists in advocating their position.
Despite the existence of various approaches to gun control, the current methods being considered are insufficient because it is impossible to achieve complete satisfaction. The problem does not lie with firearms themselves but with individuals and the absence of a loophole-free process for obtaining weapons. I have no particular standpoint as there are many well-supported perspectives. However, I do advocate for implementing a system capable of identifying those who may pose a threat to society if they have access to firearms. Although I hope that one day the United States will resolve its gun problem, I also acknowledge that this aspiration may never be realized. Nonetheless, my research has discovered some hope for the future – our country’s recognition and response to this issue indicate a potential decrease in concerns over gun control in America. Whether this decline occurs gradually or rapidly is not crucial; what matters is embracing change. From my research, it is evident that preventing problems with gun control is far from an easy task.
Work Cited
The article “Will He Fight Or Compromise?” by Zakaria, Fareed is from Time magazine and was published in 2013. The article “THE NEXT GUN FIGHT” by SCHERED, MICHAEL is the cover story in the same issue of Time magazine. Fawn Johnson wrote an article titled “Gun-Buyer Background Checks Both Effective And Politically Achievable” for National Journal in 2013. The article “Handgun Prohibition and the Original Meaning of the Second Amendment” was written by Kates B Don and was published in November 1983. Lacy Bordeaux wrote an article titled “Loophole allows for easier purchase of high-powered weapons” for CNN Radio on May 25, 2011.
