Gun Control and its Flaws

May 14, 2013
The shootings at Virginia Tech, Columbine and Sandy Hook were all horrible incidents. They were all also statistical anomalies. You are more likely to die by toaster that in a school shooting. Because of these recent events gun control has become one of the more controversial subjects. Gun control is not the solution to the problem because it doesn't function. Because of the Second Amendment, crime rates, and past attempts, gun control will not work.

The first reason we should not attempt to start regulating firearms is that it is unconstitutional. The Founding Fathers passed the second amendment before most of the other parts of the Bill of Rights because it was important. The second amendment says “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” This means that the government cannot restrict the right to own and carry guns. This is further shown in 2008 when the Supreme Court decided that the Second Amendment protects the individual’s right to guns, not just the militias. The regulation of automatic weapons and high capacity magazines was also informally discussed, according to New York Times author Stephen Crowley, and some of the justices thought that because the military and National Guard use them, the people should be able to as well. Because of the Constitution, and the way that the Supreme Court has interpreted it, gun control could not legally stand, and therefore not function.

Some people would argue by bringing up examples of mass shootings that used rifles like Sandy Hook. In both Virginia Tech and Sandy Hook over twenty-five people were killed. In both cases, the murder used firearms. While those are all true statements, the examples are all isolated and rare occurrences. According to disastercenter the murder rate and assault rate have been going down since the early 90's. At the same time, the amount of guns has not changed significantly. This shows that the two are not connected. To further the dispute with the opposing argument, the FBI has statistics showing that rifles kill less people than sharp weapons. The amount of homicides with a rifle are trivial when shown in comparison to the rest of the murders. These statistics show that gun control would not help.

The final reason that shows that gun control is pointless is the previous attempts at it. In the late 90's Australia passed a very large bundle of firearm bans and regulations. The murder rate, suicide rate, and murder with a firearm rate were unaffected by the changes. This should serve as a dead giveaway that it is a lost cause. To bring the issue closer to home, Chicago has a rising murder rate. According to author Jen Christensen, this is the exact opposite of the nations as a whole. What makes this a relevant point is that Chicago has the strictest gun control in the country. Previous attempts clearly show that regulating guns is not an effective strategy.

Because it does not work, gun control is not the solution that we are currently looking for. The Second Amendment, murder rate, and previous attempts all show that gun control does not work. Since gun regulations and bands do not work, we need to stop pushing them forward through Congress. It might be time to start looking at the person holding the gun.

Post a Comment

Be the first to comment on this article!

Site Feedback