In today’s perspective, an individual carries many different emotional and physical responses to sociological and economical stress and these stresses can be affected by violence and probable chance of violence. (Cooper, 1) There is a constant paranoia of fear psychosis acting on the resident of an economically and sociologically developed society due to different stress.
I. Reason #1
It has been found that there are many short and long term affects of victimization especially in relation to fee usage of firearms and thus Gun Control Laws are needed. There are many short and long term affects of victimization especially in relation to adolescence.
This paranoia of fear psychosis is instigated to become violent once the subject is armed with a firearm. It is easy to deem this as a trigger-happy syndrome but the fact remains to be very volatile and fearful. The statistics that have been formulated about continuations of violence and the sources of the violent behavior have become staggering. In November 1998, a Japanese student new in California was shot dead when he tried to find a specific address from a middle-aged resident at the middle of the night due to miscommunication and language problem.
Such examples are abundant and this is the reason it is necessary to look into the matter of gun control policy. (Butterfield, 1)
It is also reported that a 40% of rapes or sexual crimes occur at the victim’s home, 20% at a friend’s or relative’s home, 10% on the street and 7% in a parking lot or garage. The average age of rapists is 31, 52% of them are white, in one out of three rapes the perpetrator was under the influence of drugs(4%) and/or alcohol(30%). However, the most interesting fact about this is 6% of rapes involve a weapon, half use a gun, and half use a knife. (Fletcher, 154)
II. Reason #2
Experts amidst researchers and policymakers should managed considerable thought toward understanding how short and long term influences of abuse, including drugs, alcohol, and other substance abuse along with mental health stress. The understanding of immediate affects abuse would have, how it relates to voluntary behaviors.
The main objective is to develop a form of argumentative system that would be instrumental in helping out the policymakers and enable them to lead a normal logical conclusion on the subject of gun control policy and life within the main stream of the society. It is needed to formulate a policy or practice that would enable the government to determine a policy to put restriction on the guns. It s important to include population from different occupations and interview them for their views on the subject opposing the policy unrestricted access to firearms. (Kar, 226)
The formulation of this research would be based on the surveys taken on the various government officials, general population and adolescents whereby it would be ascertained about the amount of agreement on the topic of gun control in the United States. Alongside a large amount of data would be collected to determine the detrimental affects of free ownership of guns in the mass population without government restrictions.
III. Reason #3
United Kingdoms would be taken into consideration to evaluate the effects of government regulation of firearms and the firearms related crime rates of the two nations would be compared. A memorandum prepared in this process could be a vital part of the proposal to eradicate the policy-unrestricted access to firearms.
It is believed that the adolescents suffering from victimization goes through a huge psychological defoliation therefore it is important to address this case and the ultimate affect when some of them get free access to firearms. The government officials would be taken into consideration, specifically security and law enforcement officials, because these are the section that could convey the actual result of free access to firearms. Lastly, the general population would be considered because they are the main sufferers and it is important to incorporate their individual and social views.
Criminologists agree with each other that youth equates to violence and are alarmed because the crime prone 16-24 year-olds will be growing in numbers during the next decade. A new breed of youth “super predators” menace the nation and even hardened criminals are afraid of them. The only real solution is to spend billions of millions of new police officers and to suspend basic civil rights to ward off the onslaught of teen violence. To do that the preliminary method is to introduce a rigid law on gun control. Thus, there are simply no reasons for the authority not to pay heed to the subject. (Lamb, 337)
IV. Opposition’s main argument and refutation
It should be mentioned that there would always a segment of the population who would surely argue that the US Government should allow US citizen own guns and continue with the existing policy about firearms because regulation of firearms would certainly mean an attack on free will of the population. Furthermore, there would be arguments that ownership of firearm is a guarantee of self defense and there should be no policy that would revoke that right. Lastly, there would sill be a population that would believe that enquiring into such individual and social context while interviewing would result in violation of privacy. Kaplan is a believer that the country needs no Gun control laws.
Opposing member of the society on gun control like Kaplan argues that it is not possible to assume that each and every person would follow the proper enactment and rules of the law. Under such circumstances, it would require more wisdom to support free usage of firearms. Thus, the author openly supports in favour of gun control. The author believes that experts amidst researchers and policymakers should managed considerable thought toward understanding how short and long term influences of abuse, including drugs, alcohol, and other substance abuse along with mental health stress. The understanding of immediate affects abuse would have, how it relates to voluntary behaviours. The main objective of such text would be instrumental to develop a form of argumentative system that would be instrumental in helping out the policymakers and enable them to lead a normal logical conclusion on the subject of gun control policy and life within the main stream of the society. (King, 225)
However, it should be noted that Kaplan believes that “Instead of attempting to deal with the huge reservoir of guns or even only of handguns, a more cost-effective means of gun control might be the application of what is called the vice model, which forbids the sale of firearms, but not their owner- ship. The major advantage of such a law would be the avoidance of the large social costs inherent in turning millions of otherwise law-abiding citizens into criminals.” (Kaplan, 20) Similarly, Edward Glaeser and Spencer Glendon indicate that “the world of inner city youth where weapons serve as a threat point in most bargaining situations. Because police are rare and hostile, disadvantaged young men do not tun1 to the law when there is a dispute over property rights. Instead, they rely on private justice and weapons.” (Glaeser and Glendon, 458) It should be stated that Kaplan is not sure himself about the gun control policy and he prefers a middle path and that is not convincing enough in any respect. On the other hand, Glaeser and Glendon are in complete favour of the gun control policies and they are quite certain about the position they are taking. As a result, Glaeser and Glendon seem to be more reliable than Kaplan is. Glaeser and Glendon are systematic, data based in their action, and they present hard evidence instead of emotion as in the case of Kaplan. Kaplan’s use of emotional arguments actually weakens the base of the fundamental argument itself and therefore he is less convincing. Thus, the conclusion set by Glaeser and Glendon is more logical and conclusive as they state clearly their views and their goal of arguments in favour of gun control polices.
The gun control lasw is easy and highly workable within a span of a comparatively small frame of time, say a couple of months and the economic aspect behind this would be negligible too. As a result, the success of this law against gun control in the US is ready to be extremely fruitful. Sure, there are oppositions however, apart from these, as per as Ethical issues are concerned there should not be any because the law is targeted towards the greater good of the society. (Liptak, 1)
Butterfield, Fox; January 17, 2004; Rise in Killings Spurs New Steps To Fight Gangs; NYTimes.com; Retrieved http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DEED61F30F934A25752C0A9629C8B63&sec=&spon=&&scp=25&sq=los%20angeles%20Youth%20Violence&st=cse
Liptak, Adam; June 29, 2008; Gun Laws and Crime: A Complex Relationship; NYTimes.com; Retrieved
Fletcher, R; Beliefs and Knowledge: Believing and Knowing Government Policies; Howard & Price. 2003
Kar. D; History of Mass Psychology in the United States; Dasgupta & Chatterjee; 2000
King, H; Crime Today: The US Scenario; HBT & Brooks Ltd. 2001
Lamb, Davis; Cult to Culture: The Development of Civilization on the Strategic Strata; National Book Trust. 2004
Kaplan, John; The Wisdom of Gun Prohibition; Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 455, Gun Control, pp. 11-23; Sage Publications, Inc. in association with the American Academy of Political and Social Science; (May, 1999); retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1044067
Glaeser, Edward L & Glendon, Spencer; Who Owns Guns? Criminals, Victims, and the Culture of Violence; The American Economic Review, Vol. 88, No. 2, Papers and Proceedings of the Hundred and Tenth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association; American Economic Association; pp. 458-462; (May, 1998); retrieved from http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-8282%28199805%2988%3A2%3C458%3AWOGCVA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-O
Cooper, Michael; August 22, 2007; Thompson Brings Gun Control to the Fore; NYTimes.com; Retrieved