After seeing a deadly abundance of mass shootings increase over the years in the United States there is a need for new and strong gun control policies. Whenever mass shootings happen one of the most frequently asked questions is how could such tragedy have been prevented. Innocent people have died and until this day there has not been an effective law to prevent the existence of these tragedies. Additionally, states have the obligation to protect human rights by exercising control over the possession and use of firearms. Stricter gun control laws will establish protection for society and an overall safer environment. Gun control laws will also make it difficult for terrorists, the mentally ill, and criminals to obtain weapons easily because they will have to go through background checks and more security systems. In view of firearms being easy to acquire this creates a sense of fear in the safety of each individual. These days no place is considered highly safe as a result of past experiences Americans have already experienced. There have been a number of mass shootings in schools, churches, concerts, and food stores, just to mention a few. Moreover, guns used in most mass shootings have been legally purchased unfortunately the current laws that the state has oftentimes allow people who shouldn’t have the ability to legally buy guns. However, something important to take into consideration is whether the Second Amendment is as valid today as it was when the Constitution was written many believe this is a very important right in the United States. Many have the idea that criminals will continue to have access to guns regardless of the existence of stricter gun control laws. The implementation of these laws will only give the government a higher level of power over the people and citizens will be unable to protect themselves from criminals. Gun ownership is protected by the Second Amendment in the United States Constitution. Implementing new gun control laws will potentially violate American’s right to bear arms.
Firearm Death Rates and Association with Gun Control Purchase Background Check. The experiment used local agencies to execute firearm background checks and was directly associated with the reduction rates of firearm homicide and suicide. In addition, The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act will be an important component of this study. This act orders background checks on those who purchase firearms from federally licensed dealers. A background check can disqualify a person from having the ability to purchase a firearm if they have been convicted of a crime, are a fugitive from justice, are convicted of domestic violence, and others. While the procedure was being done there was an important action that is done every time an individual wants to purchase a gun from a federally licensed dealer, there has to be contact with an agency. This agency could be the FBI or local law enforcement department that was created with the purpose of taking responsibility for conducting firearm background checks. The rates that were calculated for this research were only for individuals age 21 or older due to the federal law that prohibits federally licensed dealers from selling a handgun to any individual under age 21. Moreover, for the analysis, states were matched with their background check agency which was reported in the Bureau of Justice Statistics Publication. The results from the different methods used in this study indicate that rates of firearm suicide illustrate a significant reduction “Classifications were 11.64, 8.45, and 5.74 per 100,000 population.”(Sumner et al, 2008) Furthermore, the rates for firearm homicide demonstrated a trend of reduced rates of “4.28, 4.02, and 2.81 per 100,000 population, respectively.” (Sumner et al, 2008) This study is reliable because the information used in the measures was from the government and the methods used were straightforward. Also, there was a different set of data tables that illustrated the methods that were being conducted. The researchers of this study also provided different graphs to illustrate information better.
Gun control laws are needed to take guns from the hands of those with mental illness to prevent a greater number of mass shootings in the upcoming years. There was a case in the year 2018 regarding a 19-year-old young man who killed over seventeen people and another fourteen were wounded in Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. In the aftermath of the scene, it was discussed that the 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz had previously been expelled from school as a result of disciplinary reasons. Also, it was mentioned that Cruz had a history of violent behavior law enforcement had noted Nikolas’s behavior involving domestic violence and abuse. One of the main problems was the fact that Nikolas had never been referred for mental counseling. Having weak gun control laws allowed the young man “under current federal and state laws, to legally obtain ten guns, including the AR-15 style assault rifle used in the school shooting.”(Philpott-Jones, 2018) If there would have been a background check when Cruz bought the guns this could have potentially been prevented. During 2018 the current federal laws allowed almost anyone who was 18 years old to purchase a gun with very few restrictions. One way to prevent these events from happening is expanding the authority of law enforcement to arrest those who are suspected of having a mental illness. In previous studies, it has been proven that there is a much higher chance of people with a mental disorder committing an act of violence than those without a mental disorder. Nevertheless, data has shown that half of about 200 mass shootings that have taken place in the United States since 1900 were committed by those with a diagnosed or mental disorder. The Gun Control Act and Brady Law do not restrict those who have a serious mental illness they are still able to pass background checks and obtain a legal gun. In today’s society, issues like gun ownership have become a very serious health crisis poorly addressed.
The United States is a country with a culture of gun ownership, although the type of weaponry that can be accessed such as for sports, hunting, clipped, military assault rifles, and small arms. This varies depending on the state or county that has the margin to regulate guns and requires buyer requirements of gun control, mental health tests, and others. Having stricter gun control laws makes no sense to expect criminals to abide by the laws, precisely what assailants, rapists, and murderers do is always illegal. Prohibiting the carrying of weapons is thus facilitating the work of criminals, leaving society defenseless against any attack. The only ones who will be disarmed when a law is passed against the ability to carry a gun are decent citizens, those who comply with the law. People seem to not realize that allowing the free carrying of weapons benefits the most defenseless: the elderly, the disabled, women, physically weak people, and people with limited resources who live in dangerous places. But of course, it turns out that those who issue these laws do not suffer from the problems that ordinary people suffer. Politicians live surrounded by bodyguards and from their security, they impose rules on ordinary citizens. Weapons should be prohibited for everyone except them, they can enjoy the natural right to defend themselves. In addition, there is a misconception of those who are mentally ill and their ability to own a gun “Recent gun control legislation aimed at removing guns from the hands of the mentally ill in order to reduce violence is misguided. In fact, this only contributes to the mistaken belief that there is a direct link between mental illness and violence. “( Wolf & Rosen, 2015) Instead of working on stricter gun control there should be attention given to mental health laws and funding for mental health services. Individuals in the category of mentally ill only account for a small portion of all violent conduct; they are not the problem but there should be a higher level of mental health awareness. There is no need for stricter gun control laws in the United States.
Taking everything into account with the help of experimental evidence, it could be said that in the United States, an immediate implementation of laws is needed to control firearms. Many misfortunes have happened over the years, and current law changes have not been strong enough to prevent mass shootings or other acts of gun violence from happening. It can also be observed that attention is needed to those with mental problems to avoid the constant damage that has been carried out in recent years with guns obtained legally in the hands of mentally ill individuals. Verification of the buyer's background and mental health status has to be inescapable. There is so much that a gun can cause therefore only those who can manage to use a weapon responsibly and correctly should have the ability to own a gun. The government has the responsibility to provide citizens with safety and the power to regulate gun ownership. Implementing strict gun control laws will give individuals the peace and security they seek in a country that has caused fear to many due to the ease of obtaining a firearm. Also controlling access to firearms can help reduce the number of suicides in the country. For instance, if your neighbor has a gun, your safety may be reduced rather than improved. An armed and untrained person, who also shoots down the anguish of trying to neutralize an intruder, is a danger to the neighborhood. One cannot let more innocent people die. Demanding stricter gun control laws is a way of wanting a change for the benefit of many who worry about how much guns have come to damage the country. The Second Amendment to the Constitution establishes the right of Americans to have weapons but does not prohibit the establishment of regulations and controls. In memory of the victims of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, and the victims of the other massacres, and to prevent the horror from happening again, much stricter measures must be taken into consideration.