Gun Regulation in America
Gun regulation in America has been a hotly debated subject for quite some time. One of the big controversies in America, which also contributes to the debate about gun control, is the conflict between protecting human rights and meeting the demands of a broader population (Celinska 229).
Opposing Views on Gun Regulation
Each side has opposing views on whether gun regulation is important and whether it has any advantages. One of the fundamental causes of gun control is a fear of crime and the need to effectively control it (Zimring 2). Based on the contrast in arguments relating to gun control in America, this paper discusses various perspectives of gun control in America, with a focus on whether the control is necessary, the people's attitude towards the case, and the different legislations in place over the same.
Opponents' Perspective
Opponents of gun control make the claim that the second amendment provides for individual rights to gun ownership, based on the consideration that guns are needed for self-defense from any threats whether criminals or invaders. Such an understanding points to the fact that gun ownership is a means of deterring crime rather than causing its increased occurrence. In the case of the proponents, it is argued that the second amendment was a development with the intention of the militia as a means of reducing violence, considering that restrictions against gun ownership have always been in the application and that such a perspective has the support of a majority of Americans. Despite their least regulation in the United States, guns are indeed lethal (Kopel 1213). Whether they should be regulated or not, remains a major debate among different individual in the US.
Supporters of Gun Control
From one side of the debate, Kopel (1216), make claims that it is high time that guns are treated like other consumer products as a result of eliminating the regulations imposed on their acquisition and use. Besides, other consumer commodities like cars and alcohol also contribute to the loss of life as guns do, yet they do not have as many regulations as that of the weapons. From a survey conducted in 2000 on the issue of gun regulations, it is revealed that a significant majority of Americans are in support of stricter gun laws (Dreier 92). Such contrasting perspectives are indeed the center of a debate about gun control.
Importance of Gun Regulation
From an in-depth view, it is evident that guns should be regulated. Ideally, control ensures that guns get into the hands of responsible individuals and not those who would use them inappropriately. Besides, it is important that with appropriate legislations, the sale of guns would involve subjecting the buyers to a background check, which reveals more information about the individual before being given a gun (Dreier 93). As such, the regulations in such a case would involve preventing guns from reaching the hands of criminals and others who would possibly use them inappropriately. Unknown to many people is the fact that the conflict over the necessary and sufficient measures for gun control are usually conflicting with ideas, values, prepositions, and the role that the government has to play (Celinska 235).
Attitudes Towards Gun Control
Similar to the case of the differences in opinion about gun control, attitudes toward the same also differ significantly. Ideally, on the aspect of attitudes on gun control, the two ideas that come to perspective are that indeed, it is important for guns to be regulated. However, a different attitude would view the issue considering that it is most important that individual rights to own guns are protected (Winkler 694). One obvious factor about the attitudes towards gun control is mainly aroused by certain occurrences such as shooting incidences. Blocher and Miller (310), make a clear indication that attitude to gun control issues differ depending on the case involved. In an instance in which the life of a child is taken by unlicensed gun, most arguments would demand stringent measures against gun ownership and handling (Braga 548). From the latest studies conducted on the relationship between gun control and attitudes, it is evidently presented that gun ownership is a major predictor towards the gun control laws (Celinska 234). Based on such a point of view, it is obvious that those that own guns would have a positive attitude towards gun control as the control would provide practical modalities and standards on the use of the gun. On the contrary, those that do not own guns would have a negative attitude towards gun control with the opinion that gun ownership and control is individual centered as the ownership of a gun is more for protection where the government fails (Celinska 234).
Different Types of Guns
All guns are lethal; however, others cause more damage as compared to the rest. The debate of handguns vs. assault rifles is one that has attracted the attention of many. The shift in emphasis that is currently being experienced that alters the focus of emphasis from crime to lethal violence is an element that makes firearms elements of vital importance (Zimring 5). Such an aspect brings about the understanding that whereas guns are deadly weapons, the difference on the type of gun is equally an important issue. The difference between handguns and assault rifles is that assault rifles are perceived to be weapons of war and as such should never be allowed in the public hands. Many believe assault rifles are more like semiautomatic guns, and as such with the capabilities of causing greater damage and areas such banned from the public (Dreier 93). Handguns are those weapons that lack the semi-automatic capacity and are commonly used by the public for self-protection purposes.
Effectiveness of Guns for Self-Defense
From various studies and surveys conducted with regards to the issue of gun control, results have revealed that the utilization of a gun as a means of self-defense stands as the most effective means of self-defense against an assault or robbery. Hall (303), states that guns have the capability of inflicting pain as well as devastating injuries to an individual on an immediate basis. From the ease of their operation, even people without sufficient strength for a physical defense have the capability of actually using the guns for defense purposes. Ideally, guns provide adequate defense even in instances in which an individual faces multiple assailants. Guns indeed provide a uniquely powerful means of defense to a person at reasonable costs, which ensures that a significant majority have the capacity of ownership (Hall 305). However, it is equally important to mention that policies would work best as means of reducing criminal assault rather than gun restrictions.
Federal and State Laws on Gun Control
The issue of gun control in the United States is indeed a thorny issue that requires in-depth analysis and understanding. Federal and State laws have different roles to play in the perspective of gun regulation. In fact, each of such laws works work independently. Federal laws on guns work to regulate the sale, possession, and transportation of guns. Other of the issues about guns are addressed by State laws, which ideally could differ depending on the provisions of an individual state (Ik-Whan et al. 42). Federal laws make a determination of who may or may not possess a gun. From such a perspective, it is evident that Federal laws play a significant role as compared to the State on matters of gun control and regulatory use. One of the major contributing factors of gun control is necessarily based on who should possess a firearm and whether there are any background concerns. Such a consideration is essential in ensuring that guns are used for the proper purpose only. While gun control groups have over time been in existence in different states and cities, they have mainly been composed of whites and the middle-class, who also make up the greatest percentage of gun owners (Dreier 93). Despite the existence of such groups, it is still evident that the groups are majorly guided by the provisions of Federal laws on gun ownership. Among the 42 States in the United States, all through the Second Amendment provide for the right of an individual to bear a firearm. However, with proper scrutiny of the provisions of the second Amendment, it is clearly evident that there are gaps in the system. Federal courts being the top in addressing such issues have the capability of making a backing of the constitutional tradition, thereby adopting certain strict scrutiny of variances in the review of the Second Amendment (Winkler 726).
Controversies Surrounding the Second Amendment
The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is a gun controlled/gun rights amendment. The Second Amendment is majorly the right of people to keep and bear firearms without any infringement. Despite such a clear statement and provision, the amendment still brings about some controversies. One major question that has always come is whether the Second Amendment provides for a particular aspect in which arms are supplied to civilian militia or does it have some separate provisions on the universal right to bear arms? From an in-depth perspective, it is clearly evident that the application of the second amendment requires other determinant factors such as the situation involved and the circumstances under such a situation. However, even with such elements, more focus is given on the right for an individual to own a gun (Blocher and Miller 326).
Conclusion
The debate over gun control in America is one that has been in existence for a period now; much is still expected. With differences in opinion on whether gun control should be abolished or whether there should be stricter, different individuals and parties make presentations. However, it is important to have gun control. Whereas it is not the most efficient way through which to reduce violence and crime, it could facilitate the possession of firearms by individuals that deserve to have them, and whom won't use them inappropriately. With such control; however, the kind of gun used is also of vital importance. With the Second Amendment providing individuals with the right to bear firearms, it is important that the right is subjected to scrutiny in ensuring that it all involves the proper use of guns with appropriate and effective control measures.
Works Cited
Blocher Joseph and Darrell Miller What Is Gun Control? Direct Burdens, Incidental Burdens, and the Boundaries of the Second Amendment, 2017
Braga Anthony A. More Gun Laws or More Gun Law Enforcement? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol. 20, No. 3 (summer, 2001), pp. 545-549, Wiley on behalf of Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management
Celinska Katarzyna. Individualism and Collectivism in America: The Case of Gun Ownership and Attitudes. Toward Gun Control, Sociological Perspectives, Vol. 50, No. 2 (Summer 2007), pp. 229-247. Sage Publications, Inc.
Dreier Peter. Massacres and Movements: Challenging the Gun Industrial Complex. New Labor Forum, Vol. 22, No. 2 (Spring 2013), pp. 92-95, Sage Publications, Inc.
Hall Timothy. Is There a Right to Bear Arms? Public Affairs Quarterly, Vol. 20, No. 4 (Oct. 2006), pp. 293-312, University of Illinois Press on behalf of North American Philosophical Publications
Ik-Whan G. Kwon et al. The Effectiveness of Gun Control Laws: Multivariate Statistical Analysis. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 56, No. 1 (Jan. 1997), pp. 41-50, American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc.
Kopel David B. Treating Guns like Consumer Products. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 148, No. 4 (Apr. 2000), pp. 1213-1246, The University of Pennsylvania Law Review
Winkler Adam Scrutinizing the Second Amendment. Michigan Law Review, Vol. 105, No. 4 (Feb. 2007), pp. 683-733
Zimring Franklin E. Reflections on Firearms and the Criminal Law
The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-), Vol. 86, No. 1 (Autumn,
1995), pp. 1-9
