Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Gun Control Research Paper
Gun Control Research Paper
Janet Tran
Mrs. Anthony
English 181-2
March 6, 2013
Guns: a privilege, or a right? With the rising gun crimes, the controversy of gun
control laws faces arguments on both sides that question whether gun control laws benefit
or hinder the United States. The warring sides argue over the dangers involved with guns
along with the benefits of guns and how gun control laws only make matters worse. Despite
any counter-arguments, more reasons suggest that the United States government should
Most importantly, gun control laws endanger the lives of innocent American citizens.
The institution of gun laws may decrease the number of guns carried in America, but only
serves to take the guns out of the hands of innocent people. As much as the government
does not want to believe it, an illegal gun market shall always counter their efforts to
eradicate guns. With enough financial incentive, any unregulated market will find a way to
obtain illegal items such as guns. So if the criminals can still find a means of getting guns,
these laws only prove to restrict honest gun collectors (Wright) and make them targets for
gun-toting criminals. Branching off from that subject, the elimination of guns does not lead
to the elimination of violence associated with guns. A person does not decide to murder
someone just because they happen to have a gun lying around. The criminal intent drives
people to kill, and they will find any means to achieve them, whether it involves guns or
not. Since most peoples concern with guns roots from the violence associated with them,
many often compare America to Australia and the United Kingdom since these two countries
have instituted anti-gun measures which have seemingly testified successful in minimizing
crime rates. The flaw in their reasoning, however, lies in the fact that both of these countries
had dramatically lower murder rates than the United States before they instituted
Tran 2
adult male to keep an army-issued rifle in his home. Interestingly enough, Switzerland has
one of the worlds lowest crime rates (Kenny). Many say that the Swiss can pull this off
because theyre Swiss (Williamsen), meaning that their tolerance and low crime rates
originate from their national character as a country, not because of some gun restriction.
Therefore, the problem does not lie with the existence of guns, but rather the violent intent
of America as a nation. This point only confirms that the violence associated with guns is a
reflection of our [Americas] culture, not guns (Williamsen). Also, Guns provide a self-
defense for the citizens of America. Mass gun shootings occur mostly at schools or malls
because the shooter knows that most likely no one in those places will have a gun to
retaliate and shoot them. Studies show that if a criminal knows that any given person might
hold a concealed gun, the crime and murder rates will exponentially decrease (Thompson).
Guns, in the end, actually help keep citizens safe contrary to popular belief, and
unnecessary restrictions on them will only place the innocent in the line of danger.
laws allow the government even more power over the citizens and ultimately lead the nation
to morph into the type of government in which many people suffer in more ways than one.
Many occurrences in history regarding the restriction or banning of firearms have led many
governmental bodies to take a tyrannical turn for the worst. Russia, Germany, and China
model prime examples of these occurrences. Russia had an order for all people but
Communist Party members to surrender all sabers, firearms, and ammunitions (Kenny)
which led to the deaths of millions of people found violating this law. Germany, prior to
World War II , had issued a similar surrender of all guns, leaving only the reliable worthy
enough to have a permit in their possession in fear of revolt (Kenny). China had had a gun
prohibition for a long time when chairman Mao Tse-tung came into power. Believing that
power came from the barrels of guns, he collected the guns so that the government
possessed the firepower rather than the citizens (Kenny). This sounds similar to the
Tran 3
situation occurring here in America currently. The prohibition of guns in China though, led
to millions of defenseless people dying needlessly from increased crime. The importance of
these examples stems from the fact that all of these governments had communist ideals
that ultimately led to the misfortune of their people. It seems very probable that America
could fall to this pattern of tyranny and spread feelings of resent towards the government.
Branching off from that subject, the restriction of gun laws also violates and strays away
from what the nation founded its ideals upon. Many arguments focusing on the Constitution
and the right to bear arms state that the Second Amendment was passed to protect sport
shooting, or hunting (Cooke). Since the First Amendment does not only exist to protect
Shakespeare or the Beatles (Cooke) , then this argument about the Second Amendment
negates itself. The founders of America created this nation from the desire to escape the
oppression that these gun control laws bring. If the nation turns around and marches right
back into that oppression, the efforts to form this nation have gone to waste. Guns unite
people together and Guns in possession of the people is the symbol of democracy
(Cooke), or one of the symbols, at least, that builds America into the great country people
know today.
Finally, gun control laws contribute to a failing economy. Everyone knows that
economic situation in America cannot hold out for much longer if it keeps going downhill.
Though it may not seem like it, guns actually help the economy. No one realizes the impact
that guns have on the economy. Concealed weapons contribute to a reduction in violent
crime which allows for an economic gain of 6.6 billion, compared to an economic loss of
417 million due to increase in property crimes (Thompson). The calculated net gain still
amounts to 6.2 billion dollars, which no one can really complain about. The savings here will
disappear if the stricter gun control laws get approved by the government. In addition, over
the past few years, due to increasing paranoia and a possibly needless concern for safety,
many citizens have bought a gun. The majority of people assume that when someone buys
a gun, they intend to use it for the purpose of going out and shooting someone when really,
Tran 4
most people buy guns as a method of self defense and mental security. A number of women
have actually bought a gun contrary to the belief that women usually do not carry a gun.
According to statistics, a woman carrying a gun has a much greater deterrent effect on
crime than does a man (Thompson). If the stricter laws makes it harder for women and all
alike to obtain a gun, then the obvious effect of dropping gun sales will ensue. Since gun
sales have recently gone up, the sputter in the flow of sales will put a big dent in the market
and surely cause the market to drop to a new low. The government profits from the any
taxes that they put on the sale of guns, the permits for guns, and the license for guns. The
profit from these numerous sources will drop or even disappear if the government institutes
these new gun laws. As a result, the government will have no choice but to tax other items
that do not need taxing. With all the griping about taxes nowadays, no one wants any more
needless taxes to patch up government financial issues and mistakes. These occurrences
will only lead to a sense of resentment in the government disbanding the unity of America.
This nation does not need more economical rips and government mistakes to tear it apart.
These reasons support that the United States government should not institute
stricter gun control laws in America. Citizens should wake up from their ignorance and
spread the word to help America realize the harm these gun control laws bring. Not only do
these gun control laws take guns out of the hands of good people, but they also put them
into the hands of the people with ill intentions. Anyone who realizes this should rally and
Works Cited
Cooke, Charles C.W. "The right to bear arms and popular sovereignty: they are inextricably
linked." National Review 11 Feb. 2013: 20. Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 23
Feb. 2013
Kenny, Jack. "Gun control or killer control? After shooting incidents in which multiple victims
are killed, calls arise for gun control. But evidence tells us that guns control wanton
killers, and without guns, deaths rise." The New American 8 Oct. 2012: 35+. Opposing
Thompson, Sarah. "Gun Ownership Provides Effective Self-Defense." Guns and Violence. Ed.
Laura K. Egendorf. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1998. Current Controversies. Opposing
Williamsen, Kart. "Beyond the gun-control debate: this reflection on the Virginia Tech
massacre looks beyond the gun debate to the importance of cultural morality in reducing
Wright, Stephen E. "Gun Control Laws Will Not Save Lives." Guns and Crime. Ed. Christine
Watkins. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012. At Issue. Rpt. from "Anti-Gun Group Common
Tran 6