Crime incidences by gun users are rampant in the society. As a result family, friends and even the entire American communities have been devastated by such occurrences. For instance, there was a recent incident in a school in Florida, where the attacker managed to shoot children and eventually kill himself. It is a clear example that indeed, there should be a major crackdown on gun usage to regulate the improper usage of guns. Strict adherence to the implemented laws should be the norm of the country to curb such prevalent cases. It is prudent to say the causes of improper gun use and the enactment of strict laws can regulate crime activities. Different researchers have compiled analytical data and evidence of the previous crime. (Jeremy et al., p 11)
Some of the common causes of crime increase are access to guns by alcoholics and mental persons and the use of unlicensed firearms. Most families have been devastated by the increased criminal activities. Statistics point out that, the United States has the highest number of guns worldwide. Therefore the accessibility of firearms within the country is not a significant problem. There have been various motions that have been presented in the Senate to curb the usage of guns. Most people believe that the introduction of this laws would help reduce excessive deadly activities that have occurred in schools, social halls, and other events. Therefore to save the people from increased crimes, implementation and strict adherence to the laws would be vital. A detailed discussion of the causes will be the epitome of this paper. Furthermore, an analysis of the policies will be provided to show how it can result in reduced crime scene efficiently.
Discussion
There has been much debate on why there is an increase in crimes. Most people attribute this to gun ownership. It is evident that the rate at which people own guns is quite alarming. A report indicates that the legal battles have resulted in a reduced number of cases. However, most people argue that everyone should be involved to control crime events. Sanctions should be imposed since it is a developed country. In most cases, it is said that gun usage is rampant because of the economic state of the nation favors the people. It has, therefore, made the people acquire guns illegally. (Mark et al., p1092)
Gun control has proved not to be successful with the apparent reason being lack of implementation of drafted laws. The government has failed to account for the number of guns in the country. Owning a gun in the United States is a sacred emblem. However, we can say that imposition of laws to curb alcoholics, and the control of mentally ill people from access to guns helps solve. It is perceived that people fail to abide by the rules and thus decide to move with firearms to sensitive places such as hospitals, schools, and restaurants. Driven by emotions, it results in cases of homicides and robbery among people. Care for the mental can immensely contribute to reduced crimes. (Patterson et al., p 262)
Previous Analysis
Different studies have been done to determine the impact the laws have to gun users and the ownership of guns within the country. There was a crackdown by police to fight illegal gun ownership within different cities. They employed various strategies within the most common being patrols, having weapon hotlines and monitoring probationers. These activities were randomly done in cities. From the operation, it was realized that most people in the towns had unlicensed firearms. Further evidence of people moving with guns to sensitive areas was common. Statistically, out of 30 individuals who were monitored either 1 or 2 people had unlicensed firearms. It was attributed to be one of the reasons for increased homicides and robberies. (Koper et al., p 341)
Further reports indicate that state laws and federal laws that were approved had a specific part in crime control positively or negatively. It was expected that having laws within the country would reduce criminal activities. However, most of the bills were never abide by, on the basis that no strict implementation was done. Statistically, it is documented that the Federal laws implemented from 1992-2012 played little in crime reduction. However, when the state took the matter seriously, positive changes were witnessed. (Lisa et al., p 394)
Conclusion
It is conclusive to say that criminal activities can be reduced if individuals take it as a collective responsibility. Most crimes are reported to have severe, devastating impacts. The citizens need to abide by the approved laws, through surrendering the illegal firearms within their possession. It can result to reduced crime events. However, a crackdown by the government can help solve such cases at the expense of implementing laws without follow up. It can significantly help the people from the increased incidences. It is worth noting that specialized attention should be provided to mental cases as it will reduce access to guns by this individuals. Further focus should be put on those individuals who consume drugs as it is a crucial contributor to criminal activities. The laws should be quite strict to eliminate the common crimes that exist within the country.
Works Cited
Adams, David, Tom Brown, and Jeremy Pelofsky. "FBI monitoring fatal Florida shooting case, as police criticized." Chicago Tribune (2012).
Duggan, Mark. "More guns, more crime." Journal of Political Economy 109.5 (2001): 1086-1114.
Kleck, Gary, and E. Britt Patterson. "The impact of gun control and gun ownership levels on violence rates." Journal of Quantitative Criminology 9.3 (1993): 249-287.
Koper, Christopher S., and Evan Mayo-Wilson. "Police crackdowns on illegal gun carrying: a systematic review of their impact on gun crime." Journal of experimental criminology 2.2 (2006): 227-261.
Vernick, Jon S., and Lisa M. . "State and federal gun laws: trends for 1970–99." Evaluating gun policy: Effects on crime and violence 345 (2003): 392-95.
