Check out the Washington Posts latest article regarding gun control!
Tag: Gun Control
Gun Control is Not the Answer- A Refutation
In this article titled, Gun Control is not the Answer: Opposing View, writer Robert Farago argues against government attempts to limit gun ownership by criminals. Farago’s opposition to gun control revolves around two main arguments. First, he argues that government intervention won’t work because evil people exist and will continue to do evil regardless of law. Farago’s second argument is the idea that “killers” should be locked up in prisons or mental institutions, to restrict their access to opportunities for violence.
Farago’s first argument is explained with the quote: “There will always be evil men among us. Truth be told, they view gun control laws with the same contempt that they view laws against murder”. Although this may be a true statement in that evil people exist, simply using it as an argument against gun control is illogical. The refutation for this argument lies in the fact that some weapons are deadlier than others. Although people with violent intentions do exist, their potential to destroy human life could be vastly limited if their access to the deadliest of weapons was decreased. With effective gun control laws, access to guns to potential criminals would be greatly reduced. If the San Bernardino killer only had access to a lesser weapon such as a knife, the human toll would be greatly minimized. Thus, evil existing in humans has nothing to do with gun control, as reducing access to the deadliest of weapons could save many lives.
The second argument laid out claims “there’s only one way to stop killers from killing: Put them where they can’t get access to a gun, knife, explosives, car or any other lethal weapon. Put them in jail or a secure mental institution.” This argument ignores one of the biggest problems facing the United States today. Currently, the United States holds a larger percentage of its population behind bars than any other country in the world. Mass incarceration would only be made worse if Farago’s suggestions were fulfilled. Also, there isn’t a consideration of the selection process for incarceration or institutionalization. How would we pick out these “killers” out of a crowd? Farago leaves too many unanswered questions, and therefore his blanket argument to “lock up the killers” is invalid.
“There’s only one way to stop killers from killing: Put them where they can’t get access to a gun, knife, explosives, car or any other lethal weapon. Put them in jail or a secure mental institution.”
In conclusion, Farago makes two main claims that are easily refuted. The argument concerning the existence of evil is irrelevant. Also, the second claim regarding the incarceration of killers is unsubstantiated. For these reasons Farago’s opinion article is easily negated.
Accidental Shootings: Many Deaths Could Be Prevented
Gun control is a hot button topic in todays society. This is especially true due to the tragic spike in recent mass shootings. These shootings are causing a divide amongst the American people, which has sparked a national debate regarding the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms.
Although mass shootings are being plastered across todays media, one must realize that the number of deaths from these horrific events only makes up a slight portion of overall gun related deaths in the United States. For example, in 2015 there were 372 mass shootings in the US, killing 475 people and wounding 1,870, according to the Mass Shooting Tracker. In comparison 13,286 people were killed in the US by firearms in 2015, according to the Gun Violence Archive, and 26,819 people were injured.
The United States has 88.8 guns per 100 people, or about 270,000,000 guns, which is the highest total and per capita number in the world.
Once realizing how many people are dying from guns that are not involved in mass shootings we must look at what is causing these deaths and if gun control laws can be put in place to prevent them.
Most people in todays society are focused on the idea that criminals or bad people are behind the deaths of so many, and gun control laws need to be enforced to stop putting guns into their hands. Whilst this may be a large part of it we are forgetting that a sizable number of these deaths can be attributed to accidental gun deaths. In fact there has been 1,875 deaths so far in 2016 caused by accidental shootings (Gun Violence Archive).
“If we can develop technology that you can’t unlock your phone unless you’ve got the right fingerprint, why can’t we do it for guns?” – Obama
In order to lower the number of deaths caused by accidental shootings the government 
should put in place mandatory gun control laws for the possession of guns. These could include mandatory safety features. For example automatic child proof safety locks could be added to guns or indicators showing when a bullet was in the chamber ready to be fired. The focus on this type of safety is mainly to protect accidental gun deaths involving children as at least 265 children under the age of 18 picked up a firearm and accidentally shot themselves or someone else with it in 2015, according to numbers compiled by the gun control advocacy group.
It is believed that if these laws were implemented to install safety control features on guns the number of overall accidental gun deaths would significantly reduce. This is backed up by The US General Accounting Office (GAO) which estimated that 31% of total accidental shooting deaths could have been prevented by installing safety devices on guns and more impressively 100% of deaths per year in which a child under 6 years old shoots and kills him/herself or another child could be prevented by automatic child-proof safety locks.
“We put gates around swimming pools to keep children from drowning. We put safety caps on medications to keep children from poisoning themselves… [B]ecause children are naturally curious and impulsive, and because we have shown time and again that we cannot ‘gun-proof’ them with education, we have a responsibility to keep guns out of the hands of children.” – Marjorie Sanfilippo, PhD, Professor of Psychology at Eckerd College
Concealed Carry Killers – an Affirmative Argument
Many people are under the impression that concealed gun carriers are the “good guys,” using their guns only for self-defense, but far too often this is not the case.
Concealed carrying is a problem because it increases crime just as much as it deters it, it can turn confrontations into lethal incidents, it gives dangerous people easy access to firearms, it encourages criminals to carry guns, and it makes non-carrying people vulnerable.
Concealed Carry Killers is a resource created and updated by the Violence Policy Center that includes a considerable number of examples of “non-self defense killings by private citizens with permits to carry concealed, loaded handguns in public that took place since May 2007.” As of August 12, 2016, Concealed Carry Killers has recorded “696 concealed carry related incidents in 41 states and the District of Columbia resulting in 885 deaths.”
Concealed guns can turn confrontations into lethal incidents.What starts out as a disagreement, can too easily turn violent or even deadly, if either of the parties have easy access to weapons. Especially if in common places such as movie theaters, bars, or even traffic (and we all know how frustrating rush hour can be)! Take the situation below for example…
Spotlight: Neighborhood shooting in Maryland |
 “On April 3, 2011, Charles Edward “Pete” Richter Jr., 66, shot and killed his neighbor Mark Xander, 55, after Xander’s Rottweiler went on to Richter’s property. Richter’s defense attorney told a judge deciding bail that Richter had a permit to carry a handgun issued by the Maryland State Police… Read More |
Concealed carrying gives dangerous people easy access to firearms. Concealed carry is good in theory, but not so much in reality. If only good, law-abiding citizens were able to obtain permits, there would be no issue. However, there is no way of guaranteeing the intents of other people or that a “good person” will continue to act the same way upon obtaining his or her permit.
The right to concealed carry encourages criminals to carry guns. Criminals will always find ways to obtain weapons, but one of the main reasons that they carry guns is to protect themselves from possible victims who are also armed.
Concealed carrying makes non-carrying people vulnerable. This is kind of an obvious one… As a non-armed person in a restaurant or bar, how would you feel knowing that strangers who are armed surrounded you? Most likely you would feel some sort of discomfort. If a fight broke out and everyone started pulling out their guns, what would you do? You would be the most vulnerable person there with no way to defend yourself.
The ability to carry concealed weapons is not as safe as it has been cracked up to be.
Here’s what the 2016 election could mean for gun control
Check out this article from The Week!
Voters in California, Maine, Nevada, and Washington are expected to approve gun control-related ballot initiatives Tuesday. The most expensive contest of the four is in Nevada, where Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety has dropped $14 million in favor of a universal background check initiative and the National Rifle Association has spent $4.8 million against it.
Maine too has universal background checks on the table, a plan proponents in each state say will save lives. Opponents argue the proposal “doesn’t target criminal behavior, it targets law-abiding behavior,” because criminals will simply buy their guns via illicit sources that won’t comply with the background check law.
The California measure would prohibit large-capacity ammunition magazines and institute selective background checks for ammunition purchases. Washington State voters are asked to consider permitting judges to ban gun ownership on an individual basis for people believed to be a danger to themselves or others. Bonnie Kristian
You’d think the government might do its job and make some laws to protect us. Well, think again.
Stephen Colbert Takes The Gloves Off: Gun Control
Former Illinois congressman and conservative radio host Joe Walsh promoting gun violence.
Bloomberg-Backed Gun Safety Group Visualizes The Numbers On Gun Violence
Check out the full article here!
A Refutation to: Are Firearm Background Checks Unconstitutional?
For many American citizens, owning firearms has been a staple of American culture that dates back to the creation of the Second Amendment in the U.S. Constitution. In many ways, owning a firearm has become traditional for many people, and it is no surprise that many American citizens argue that firearm background checks are a violation of civil rights. According to Why Background Checks Dont Work, an article on World Net Daily, Jeff Knox (the director of the Fire Arms Coalition) argues that it is unfair and perhaps unconstitutional that firearm buyers must fill out documentation and provide proof of identification to firearm sellers when purchasing a firearm. Knox‘s logic is as follows: if the right for citizens to vote is implemented by the U.S. Constitution, and that by “requiring identification to vote is a violation of civil rights,” then by the same token, requiring identification to buy a firearm is a violation of civil rights as well because the right to bear arms is also attached to the U.S. constitution. Jeff Knox uses the U.S. Constitution as a pin to falsely justify that background checks are unconstitutional. Just because voters are not required to prove their identification to vote does not warrant the same process for purchasing firearms. Background checks are intended to keep firearms out of the hands of people who have criminal backgrounds and/or people with records of mental illness. Further, the Second Amendment was included into the U.S. Constitution in 1791, 
during a time of foreign oppression. It was intended to dispel any distant governments by raising a ‘citizen army.’ However, the idea that citizen’s shouldn’t have to undergo a background check because it was the way it was done so in the past, is a fallacy of tradition- a mistake in reasoning. The meaning of the Second Amendment in preset day society raises questions as to the Second Amendments intended scope, however; the fact that firearms no longer need to fire a single shot before requiring a reload is a clear indication that the way we interpret the Second Amendment must also reflect the way advances in firearm technology effects society, while also considering that the United States no longer needs a ‘citizen army.’
Gun Control is Out of Control 