James Thomas Mr. Munoz Dual Credit Eng., Per. 5 December 15,2014 Will Bans Work? Because of the many recent school and public mass shootings that have ended in death and injury, the Second Amendment has been put into question: should civilians have the right to ‘own assault weapons? Assault weapons were created as an alternative to military grade weapons, which were deemed as too dangerous for civilian use.-Anti-gurractivists feel that-assault -weapormmordeemectas a trae mititary grate weaporshould-beavaitabletrthre pubtic: The debate is whether or not banning assault weapons is seen as effective against violent crime rates, Banning assault weapons is not as effective as having better security and educating the public about firearm safety. Pro-gun activists base their side of the debate on the fact that the Second Amendment protects their rights to legally purchase a firearm and use it for commercial use or self-defense. The Second Amendment reads: "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" (“The Constitution”). This amendment is part of Bill of Rights, a document aimed towards the national government because the citizens of the United States felt that they did not have enough freedom. Since the Second Amendment was ratified, United States citizens have the right to own firearms of any kind, so long as the weapon is used properly. This means that the owner must be fit,emotionally and psychologically, to own any kind of firearm ranging from a simple .22 caliber pistol all the way to a .50 caliber rifle, Certain regulations go along with this such as: you must be eighteen in order to buy a rifle or shotgun, you must be twenty-one to buy a pistol, you must have a background check every time you purchase a firearm, and you must register the weapon as soon as you purchase it The Constitution is the basis for our government and other legal procedures, so why is the Second Amendment being put into question? The framers of the United States Constitution knew that American citizens should not only have to rely on the government for protection. If someone is trying to break into your house to cause you physical harm, perhaps even end your life, would you not want to be able to defend yourself? The Second Amendment was created in order for the common defense; for everyone to be able to defend your own life in the case that you are left without the aid of a police officer or other military officer. Anti-gun activists see this and ask the only logical question: what is the right to bear arms? What is the definition of arms? Pro-gun activists would define the right to bear arms as the right to own any tool that can be used as an effective weapon to defend yourself. This means that if the person must have an 2 wult weapon in order to feel safe in their own home, then the Second Amendment grants their right to do so. The definition of arms is any weapon that is not military grade or capable of mass destruction. Anti-gun activists believe that an assault weapon is the same as any military grade weapon. It is true that most assault weapons are based on military grade weapons such as the M16, it is not true that assault weapons are military grade. Assault weapons are usually classified with these characteristics: a pistol grip, high magazine capacity, a stock made to absorb continuous shots ina short period of time, and semi-automatic (every time you pull the trigger one bullet is fired from the chamber). Nagetck pot kK CG bree -Bro.gun-sotivist-are-egeinatshe-banning of.assault weapons because eh done nothing in the way of reducing crime rates. Statistics show that since the Federal Assault Weapon Ban of 1994 was not renewed in 2004 there has been a significant decrease in violent crime rates that included assault weapons, “The nation’s total violent crime rate peaked in 1991. Since then, through 2012, it has decreased 49%, to a 42-year low, including a $2% drop in the nation’s murder rate, to a 49-year low—perhaps the lowest point in American history” (“Ten Reasons”). This is because of the millions of assault weapons produced and sold to the American people, also having an all-time high of ownership (“Ten Reasons”). The opposing argument is that, “[iJn the ten years that the federal ban on assault weapons was in effect, the percentage of assault, weapons traced to crime fell by 66 percent. The ban worked” (“About Military-Style”). This statement is flawed because of the lack of evidence: “The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives says it can ‘in no way vouch for the validity’ of Brady Campaign's claim...that the federal ‘assault weapon’ law reduced crime” (“Ten Reasons”). Since the ban only lasted for 10 years, its effectiveness cannot be accurately documented. The biggest issue with the assault weapon debate is because of the recent mass shootings: Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut—20 children and 6 faculty murdered with a semiautomatic copy of the U.S. military's M-16 rifle; Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado—13 killed and 23 wounded with four guns, including 55 rounds fired from a TEC-9 semi-automatic assault pistol; Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton, California—s small children killed and30 wounded with a semiautomatic copy of the Soviet military's AK-47 rifle. ("About Military-Style Assault Weapons”) Though all of these shootings included assault weapons, they could have been easily avoided had there been more security or a higher number of people that carried a firearm, The main issue is not “why do we have people with ‘highly lethal weapons,” the bigger question should be “why do we allow public places, such as schools, not have security guards that are capable with dealing with areas that are capable of mass shootings?” If these three schools had better equipped ter trained officers or personal firearm owners then perhaps all of this could have been avoided. A few examples of these are: the Pearl High School shooting, the Parker Middle School % shooting, the Trolley Square shooting, and the San Antonio Theater shooting (Broderick). The Pearl High School shooting involved Luke Woodham, a student at the school, bringing a knife to school: “Woodham was stopped by Assistant Principal Joel Myrick, a U.S. Army Reserve commander, who detained Woodham by using a .45 caliber semi-automatic pistol he kept in his truck, until authorities could show up” (Broderick). The Parker Middle Schoo! shooting involved Andrew Murst bringing a .25-caliber pistol to his middle school dance: “It was ended when James Strand, the owner of the banquet hall the dance was happening in, confronted Wurst with his personal shotgun” (Broderick). The Trolley Square shooting involved Sulejman Talovié firing in a public square in Salt Lake City: “He was comered, however, by off-duty police officer Kenneth Hammond, who held him in position before authorities could arrive” (Broderick). The San Antonio Theatre shooting involved Jesus Manuel Garcia opening fire in a San Antoni ‘The gunman was eventually shot and struck by an off-duty police officer, Lisa Castellano, who was working at the theater that night” (Broderick). All of these incidents did nothave the chance to become mass shootings because of personal firearm owners that stopped the perpetrator before he caused a high body count. It is true that most mass shootings involve assault weapons but just like the incidents listed before they can be stopped before there is a high body count. The solution to stopping mass shootings is not banning assault weapons, rather it is more effective to have better security measures along with educating the public about firearm safety. If more people carry a firearm on their person instead of just relying on police force, then most mass shootings can be stopped in its early stages. grater Eg opice (ones | Looking into violent crimes alone, assault weapons are only used in a fraction of violent crimes leading to injury or death. “The vast majority of firearms that gun control supporters call ‘assault weapons’ are rifles, and during the most recent five years of data, there were nine times as many murders with knives, blunt objects (hammers, clubs, etc.), and ‘personal weapons” (‘Ten Reasons”), Banning assault weapons will not help solve violent crime rates since most firearms used in murders and other felonies are not registered and are usually bought by an unlicensed dealer or on the black market. The main issue is not the weapon itself but the people that use them, Looking back on mass shootings, every perpetrator was mentally and emotionally unstable that then bought the assault weapons used in the shootings from unlicensed dealers. The Sandy Hook Elementary School shooter, Adam Lanza, was diagnosed with a controversial disorder called "sensory integration disorder” or sensory processing disorder! “Those with sensory processing disorder or SPD may over-respond to stimuli and find clothing, physical contact, light, sound or food unbearable. They may also under-respond and fee little or no reaction to pain or extreme hot and cold” (James). The Columbine High School shooters, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, both fell into the Nazi occult and played violent first person shootergames that altered their vision on reality ("Dylan Klebold"). The Cleveland Elementary School shooter, Patrick Purdy, was diagnosed with a mild case of retardation as a child and then grew up blaming Asians for all of his hardships ("Patrick Edward Purdy"), Keith Morgan, president of the West Virginia Citizens Defense League, states that “[p]eople are killed in greater number by cars, bats, hammers, hands, and feet...Examining the tool and attempting to ban the tool will have absolutely no effect. We're dealing with a people problem. We've got to find a people solution” (“Why Gun Groups”).