Introduction
An issue is that gun violence is very high in the state of Pennsylvania over recent years. In Philadelphia, the percentage of homicides from just 2017 to 2018 has gone up 12% (FOX29). Gun violence will always be a problem but private sales policy makes taking someone's life away easier. In Pennsylvania, an unlicensed seller may only sell a handgun or short-barreled rifle or shotgun to an unlicensed purchaser at the place of business of a licensed importer, manufacturer, dealer, or county sheriff’s office (Gifford’s Law Center).
Policy
Private sales is a policy that connects to gun violence. The private sales creation is unknown because no law has been passed yet. Privates sales policy with guns is that someone with no gun license can sell a gun to an unlicensed person as long as there at a licensed dealer. This soon-to-be policy will be under the state of Pennsylvania in which the law will apply to all citizens in Pennsylvania. However, it’s not a law yet so people are resulting in background checks. The purpose of the background check is the approach of ensuring that guns are not sold to prohibited people. So people take their guns to licensed dealers and they are supposed to do the background check on the buyer (Giffords Law Center). Twenty Six states require background checks at the point of transfer here are 14 states: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. In some of these states, background checks are only needed on handguns and assault weapons (Giffords Law Center). These quotes show how people are using loopholes to get their hands on guns. This policy is being created to make it harder for someone to get a gun.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
Issue With Policy
The issue with this policy is that background checks are not always being issued. This is an issue for the policy because if the purpose of making background checks is supposed to be harder for someone to get a gun but isn’t being applied to everyone that is a reason people are going to private sellers to buy a gun. This can be fixed by making background checks harsher and stopping allowing unlicensed people to sell to another unlicensed person through a licensed dealer. An example of harsher background checks is the checking of basically everything since little kid days so like hospital records. In March 2010, John Patrick Bedell strolled up to the Pentagon and started shooting at two police officers with a semiautomatic handgun. Months before the attack, he tried to buy a gun in California but was denied, after a background check showed he had a documented history of mental illness (Chris Kirkham). This quote shows that not all states are following the background checks that add to people who shouldn’t mentally have guns in their possession being able to get a hold of a gun. This can be more effective than the original policy because it's making the process of a background check longer and more complex making sure no mental illnesses have previously been an issue or a present issue.
Connection With Issue
The weak policy allows people to take a quick and easy way to get a gun which if someone wanted to kill somebody they can. More than a decade ago there were two students who opened fire in a classroom on their classmates they had a semiautomatic rifle, pistol, and shotguns that they got from acquaintances that went to a local gun show. The students brought the guns with cash and no background check was issued during the exchange (Chris Kirkham). This quote shows how easily the students were able to get the guns and shoot their classmates. If this policy that connects with background checks were in place the kids wouldn’t have been able to get their hands on a gun to kill their classmates and this is where gun violence takes key at. Allowing someone to get their hands on a gun faster just leads to no good and innocent people get their lives taken away. In the previous example of the man who got denied buying a gun in California due to his history of mental illness was a perfect way of doing background checks. If the people in the Pentagon had gone by the state of California’s rules of a background check then those two officers wouldn’t have gotten shot. This connection between the policy and the issue is that it's an easier way of getting a gun due to the private sales policy that it contributes to the high amount of gun violence. It will always increase because of how fast and easy you can get a gun which is a major reason gun violence is continuously rising in Pennsylvania.
Other Side
Some people may say that the policy is fine the way it is because it's continuing the 2nd amendment the right to bear arms. Others might say that the policy is good because they are the ones that are benefitting from the sales. An example the NRA is a prominent source that strongly agrees with people having guns because they benefit from people buying guns even the people who participate in the private sales policy will see no wrong. The ones who disagree that the process of being able to get hold of a gun easily isn’t harsh enough are the ones who probably haven’t experienced the hurt of losing a loved one due to gun violence. Earlier in the essay I mention the homicide percentage went up 12% just from the years 2017 to 2018 (FOX29). In the state of Pennsylvania, more specifically the communities of Philadelphia are suffering from the constant killings that are involved in gun violence and no change is happening. But people will always use the 2nd amendment to back up why having guns is okay but won’t acknowledge that the majority of people with guns are unlicensed, so are they really using them in the right manner?
Action
Some actions I would take to solve this problem are getting in contact with our representatives of our state or just even our districts so that they can be informed and hear our opinions and push for change in our communities, do surveys that inform people on private sales then get their opinions on the connection of the policy and gun violence, lastly is form a group of kids in Philadelphia that want to make change on gun violence where we make it known worldwide about gun violence that it get to other kids from different states to form groups as well to make change in their states. I would use these as actions because if our people in the higher power have to constantly hear about gun violence all the time and from a bunch of teenagers they will eventually have no other choice but to take action in making laws or policies on gun ownership harsher. Everyone says that we are the voices why not use them to make change?
Stuck on your essay?
