Orduna 1

Rebecca Orduna

Monica Rodriguez

ENGL 1302

22 April 2022

Gun Control

In the past few years, mass shootings in public places, including schools and shopping

malls, have continuously sought effective rather than strict gun control laws. Gun control is a

contentious issue between people who want privatization for protection and those demanding for

strict gun restrictions for lower gun-related crimes. Representatives of both sides of the debate

for and against gun control laws admit to the increasing number of deaths and injuries as a result

of the proliferation of firearms in the public sphere. Today, guns are easy to buy and license, and

it is a growing concern among criminal gangs that have access to illegal firearms from

underground black markets in the streets and the dark web. Regardless of this growing concern

on internal security, Congress is yet to change gun control laws to protect the communities

vulnerable to mass shootings and gun-related cases. In essence, the debate about modifying the

country's strict gun regulations is controversial; however, it is also crucial to reexamine the

existing gun laws while the majority of the public demands expandable and flexible gun laws

that subsequently lead to effective control and reduced gun-related deaths.

Shortcomings of Gun Control Policies

Gun control and gun laws have been a political issue in America for a long time,

especially since the late 20th century. Particularly, during the gangland-era legislators were

compelled to enforce strict gun laws with the thought that it would deter gun-related crimes and
 Orduna 2

deaths. However, as the situation worsened in the 60s and 70s with an increasing incidence of

crime and gun violence, more states imposed strict gun regulations (Philip and Pollack 4). An

example of gun control policy today is the Gun Violence Restraining Order. Typically, this policy

is favored by a majority of Americans and has been championed by President Trump and Vice

President Pence. According to Pear et al. the GVRO would allow law enforcement, family

members, or school officials to request that guns be removed temporarily from individuals

deemed a danger to themselves or others. Many states have passed GVRO laws. "Red Flag" laws

have been signed into law in Florida, Indiana, and Maryland (Philip and Pollack 4). Noteworthy,

many Americans are not familiar with this policy because it has not been effective in reducing

gun-related crimes as the government promised. As Loftin et al. argue, this analysis showed that

this law did not "produce expected reductions in gun crime in Detroit" (310). With this in mind,

the state and the federal government must focus on implementing laws and ensure they do what

they have been passed to do.

The legislators have remained rigid in revising the gun laws even though it is now clear

that these laws were ineffective. As such, gun violence has resulted in an increased number of

homicides and related deaths since the passing of strict gun control laws. It is worth pointing out

that "this is a public health crisis that warrants our collective attention, including our voices and

our votes to demand our elected officials in Washington, DC, take immediate action to reduce

gun violence in America'' (Nickitas 97). In addition to that, there are more mass shootings today

than before the emergence of gun control laws. More so, this trend is a result of arming "the 1996

Dunblane Massacre of sixteen British school children and one teacher led to the passage of two

firearms acts and a permanent ban on private handgun ownership in the UK" (Newman and

Hartman 1528). Most mass shootings are witnessed in schools, malls, and social events.
 Orduna 3

It is distressing to law enforcement agencies that the patterns of gun violence are random

and unpredictable. Newman and Hartman argue that Americans, no matter their political views,

"are responsive to tragic events like mass public shootings" (1549) and "are more likely to prefer

gun control" (1549) because of this. Fear should not be stopping congress from passing laws that

will eventually make us safer instead it should fuel them to want to pass these laws. Newman and

Hartman state that "members of Congress from both political parties have been largely reticent

on the issue, reluctant to pass legislation regulating firearms for fear that they lack sufficient

public support to challenge powerful gun rights groups" (1547). We should not wait for another

shooting to finally pass these laws for our protection.

Future Policy Consideration

The government should be informed and take the responsibility of determining those

Americans eligible for possession of a controlled number of firearms. Typically, this involves

imposing strict regulations on firearm sellers to ensure that they conduct comprehensive

background checks on criminal history and mental illnesses. Americans should take the time to

educate themselves on all sides of this topic and "family, friends, and community about how gun

violence is a public health issue" (Nickitas 98). Then again, some people think more guns mean a

safer environment, but if that is true the United States should have been the most peaceful nation

in the world? In reality "there are more than 30,000 gun deaths in the United States each year"

(Helmke 551). Law enforcement agencies should also be more aggressive in infiltrating and

shutting down underground arm sellers that equip criminals with deadly weapons. This is a

strong foundation for the regulated purchase of weapons, allowing law-abiding citizens to protect

themselves and their property from criminals.

 Orduna 4

Subsequently, the country does not need stricter gun control laws while they risk

increasing the incidence of crime and gun violence. Even though gun control is a controversial

topic in America, Helmke strongly suggests that "there are very few federal laws restricting

access to guns, and those have serious loopholes" (551). Admittedly, this is a very valid point

because one way or other criminals are still finding ways of getting their hands on dangerous

weapons. Philip states that if we find a way to cut off the supply of firearms to gang members,

minors, and other legally disqualified individuals "the rate of gun violence would dwindle

rapidly, and in six months be a fraction of its current level" (3). Substantially, this is because the

firearm would be substituted with a less dangerous weapon and "a lack of single-minded

intention to kill in the first place" (Seitz 601). Besides, Seitz argues that "firearms are more

deadly than other weapons in an attack situation" (600) so if guns are harder to come by these

attacks would most probably be less deadly. Advocates for strict gun control laws would seek

more restrictions to reduce the proliferation of guns as a reasonable approach. Again, "reduction

in firearms accessibility would likely result in a reduction of criminal homicides" (Seitz 601).

Based upon the logic that if there are fewer weapons on the streets, there will be less gun

violence.

The commercialization of firearms is a subject worth giving new consideration. Philip

argues that "the main concern should be less about the current stock of guns in private hands and

more about the flow of guns: the ease of obtaining one for criminal purposes" (3). We should not

focus on how many guns are out in public and more on how to stop people from obtaining them

so easily. “An estimated 270 million guns are in private hands nationwide" and "effective control

is said to be beyond reach" (Philip 3). Noticeably, many Americans have purchased firearms for

their protection and this has significantly helped defend them from criminals. Guns in the hands
 Orduna 5

of the right people, law-abiding Americans, actually help deter crime. In essence, they can scare

off, wound, seize, or kill the perpetrators during the occurrence of a crime. Still, it is unclear

whether allowing people to own guns in their homes and workplaces will reduce gun-related

deaths. Simply put, there is a need for further research to inform the best approach for gun

restrictions on the privatization of firearms. Noticeably, the welfare and well-being of the people

are at stake as it regards gun ownership and gun control.

Conclusion

Ultimately, there has been an increase in mass shootings due to the rampant gun control

laws. To address this problem, we need stricter gun control laws. The current narrative is that

taking guns from law-abiding citizens will stop mass shootings and lower the death toll.

However, these are not effective and have even resulted in more deaths because these guns were

taken illegally by individuals not trained in how to use them responsibly. As a result, people

commit mass shootings which result in more deaths than if they had not had access to guns. Even

though people like Lacey Wallace, who conducted a survey of college students on the topic of

smart guns and found that “about half of the sample preferred smart guns over traditional

firearms” (55), have already found solutions to gun violence further research should still be

conducted. Because opponents of gun control laws believe that it is a violation of the second

amendment, this research should also find a way around it. Stell argues that “there is no serious,

citizenship-based right to bear arms'' (29). As a result, people should not rely solely on the

second amendment to support their position against gun control.

 Orduna 6

Works Cited

Helmke, Paul. “Targeting Gun Violence.” Public Administration Review, vol. 73, no. 4, Wiley,

2013, pp. 551–52, http://www.jstor.org/stable/42003075.

Loftin, Colin, et al. “Mandatory Sentencing and Firearms Violence: Evaluating an Alternative to

Gun Control.” Law & Society Review, vol. 17, no. 2, [Wiley, Law and Society

Association], 1983, pp. 287–318, https://doi.org/10.2307/3053349.

Newman, B. J., & Hartman, T. K. (2019). “Mass shootings and public support for gun control.”

British Journal of Political Science, 49(4), 1527-1553.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123417000333

Nickitas, Donna M, Ph.D., RN, NEA-BC, C.N.E., F.A.A.N. (2013). “With our voices and our

votes: Advocating gun control.” Nursing Economics, 31(2), 57-57, 98. Retrieved from

https://tamiu.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/with-o

ur-voices-votes-advocating-gun-control/docview/1347612124/se-2?accountid=7081

Pear, V. A., Schleimer, J. P., Tomsich, E., Pallin, R., Charbonneau, A., Wintemute, G. J., &

Knoepke, C. E. (2021). “Implementation and perceived effectiveness of gun violence

restraining orders in california: A qualitative evaluation.” PLoS One, 16(10)

doi:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0258547

Philip J. Cook, and Harold A. Pollack. “Reducing Access to Guns by Violent Offenders.” RSF:

The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, vol. 3, no. 5, Russell Sage

Foundation, 2017, pp. 2–36, https://doi.org/10.7758/rsf.2017.3.5.01.

Seitz, Steven Thomas. “Firearms, Homicides, and Gun Control Effectiveness.” Law & Society

Review, vol. 6, no. 4, [Wiley, Law and Society Association], 1972, pp. 595–613,

https://doi.org/10.2307/3052950.
 Orduna 7

Wallace, L. N., & Dunn, K. C. (2018). “College student attitudes towards "Smart" guns: Results

from a nationwide survey.” Journal of Community Health, 43(1), 55-64

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10900-017-0387-7.