Security is an important aspect in any country and should never be jeopardized under any circumstances. The guns are essential in maintaining the law and order by the government. Nevertheless, it is risky when such deadly weapon fall into the hands of common citizens. Any arms are meant to be used in providing security by the relevant bodies of the legitimate government. People want to feel safe; therefore, the public is rather concerned with the danger caused by possession of weapons such as guns. It is, therefore, vital to have total control over the weapons circulation as many heinous activities are likely to increase when all people receive possibility to possess guns. The current paper studies the idea of that the gun control laws are important for the reduction of the crimes rates; therefore, they need to be modified to include the issue of the legally owned firearms for personal protection.
The gun debate is a disturbing issue to the governments of any countries that experience atrocities due to the weapon mishandling; the debate has been hot in the US for the past few decades already. Squires (2012) admits that various cases of different crimes associated with the guns have been reported across the US. Consequently, the government had to ban illegal handling of such arsenals. The matter is that every citizen desires to have any cases of massacres completely eliminated. The security of a nation relies on both the general public and security department and not one of them only. Previously, people used to believe that possession of guns could help improve their safety; however, it turned to have an opposite result. The possession of arms increased the cases of killing and injuring. Quite normally, the debate on the gun possession has followed the two paths. According to the report by the Office of Justice Programs (2013), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is strongly advocating the level of freedom granted to the people, who, however, are sometimes misusing it. The chances of the debate to come to conclusion are not clear as people have different interest in the guns possession. It could be sound to allow the weapon possession only by the legalized and appropriate departments or bodies of the government. According to Lott (2013), many can claim that they have the right to own the weapons, but it is extremely crucial for the government to ensure that the weapons are not used for committing the crimes or any form of atrocities. The ending of the debate will greatly depend on the decision of the state to satisfy the interest of either few people or the whole nation.
Enough facts have been already gathered, and it becomes clear that killing has been an ongoing problem especially using the guns. Lott (2013) indicates that the cases of homicides are on the rise because of handguns, which are now carelessly handled by many citizens. The reported cases of the minors using the guns possessed by their parents are reported, as well. This fact, therefore, calls for the important reasoning and strategy in order to ensure that the issue is under control before it becomes worse. The main objective is to find the best way possible in order to mitigate the dangerous situation. Andrés and Hempstead (2011) report that the possession of firearms automatically means massive use of the weapon by citizen. Loss of life becomes not a mere incident; therefore, the issue needs thorough research. The initial decision to legalize possession of the guns by the government was meant to improve the security of the public, but the situation has changed. A report by the Office of Justice Programs (2013) demonstrate that the gun deaths doubled in the period of 1985-1991 and did not fall back to the 1985 level until 1995. It is a difficult and sometimes unsuccessful to control the use of such lethal items when possessed by citizens. However, it will be vital to ensure that the guns are owned only by people who can effectively handle them for the right purposes and are above 21 years of age.
Considering the interest of the whole society, the idea that the gun control is vital is the best to go with. First, people have to agree that possession of guns is not the solution to insecurity but it only worsens the situation. According to the facts, there is an increase of the number of killings as a result of the gun shooting. It will be important to amend the law. The Office of Justice Programs (2013) reports that, though it is difficult to convince some people in the need to change their attitude towards gun possession, the step is crucial. People have thought that guns are the best safety mechanisms. Different people have different ideas concerning the gun ownership (Squires, 2012). Guns are usually considered the symbols of honor, self-sufficiency, and respect for social authority. It, therefore, means that people are likely to shoot each other in case of any conflict. Instead of reporting the cases to the police, people will become tempted to use personal firearms for revenge. The issues, therefore, need the law to control the weapon possession. Andrés and Hempstead (2011) add that the cases of the minors taking their parents’ guns for the ill motives means that the owners are not aware of the danger of keeping such items in the reach of children. The government should ensure that anybody who wishes to get the license for guns is of sound mind and is able to keep it safe. McCreary (2013) asserts that a certain age of 21 years should be set for those who own a gun. It is the best policy to ensure that people are safe.
The thesis is well composed and contained. First, the reason is well-defined in order to fit the main objective since it is addressing a topic that requires reconsideration. A proper and mindful issuance of guns to citizens is the major point. Nowadays, the law here faces controversies. The research is well-equipped with the characterizing statistics. The statistics by the FBI department shows that the police are also spared from the wrath of the citizens who possess guns. As per the reports, 20 percent of the law enforcement officers are killed with weapons (Squires, 2012). The cases of guns assault have shown an alarming increase; it is horrifying that some individuals use the same weapons to commit suicides. In the past decades, young people were used to settling their conflicts using their fists and knives. However, the situation has changed in that people have started settling the disputes with the guns. According to the report by the Office of Justice Programs (2013), the rise in the murder cases committed by young individuals (it constituted the entire growth in killings in the post-1985 period) was caused all by the guns use. This fact depicts how dangerous the recklessness of weapons can be.
The research done is quite enough to convince the government or the whole world on the need to be sensitive to the importance of regulation in weapons possession and use. The facts are well brought into sight. The evidence, ranging from the reports from the criminal investigation to the studies conducted, are well established. The research done is enough to make the existing law change its course. Moreover, it is a subject to many governments of different states (McCreary, 2013). For a researcher, one thing is clear that the whole issue addressed is facing many predicaments. The initial idea to provide people with the opportunity to possess guns was the initiative of the government; however, today the same idea is facing controversies. It will be difficult to control the issue albeit all necessity. Nevertheless, the debates should not inhibit the whole process. From the researches on the topic, it is clear that the control over the gun issues is the most appropriate way to deal with the violence. The authorities ought to be licensed and held accountable for any misuse of such commodities; yet, the same commissioning bodies face some problems from the strong opposition of either the Democrats or Republicans. Therefore, in any case, the law to control the guns will face numerous problems. With most gun regulations consisting of many “interrelated subparts, there is also no clear rule for defining what should count as a separate law” (Andrés & Hempstead, 2011). As insisted, anyone under 21 years should not possess guns. Those in possession of the weapons should prove their capabilities to keep the items safe. Person’s sanity will also be an important aspect to be considered in licensing. The rules will greatly contribute to the misuse of weapons. McCreary (2013) mentions that more than 40 nations have repealed all or almost all local gun-control regulations; consequently, the total number of the gun laws has decreased. It is optimistic that more laws regulating the use of the weapon will reduce the violence level.
In conclusion, the gun debate, which is a part of the modern age, has addressed an important keynote that holds a great value in supporting the research. It reflects the state of the conflict between two groups with different interests. The debate over the law enforcement safety is unusual because those who believe in their rights to carry guns threaten the police officers’ lives, but do not even have anecdotal evidence. The claims are, therefore, well-validated by the general public. The argument has been recurring, and now it causes a big debate. The cases of shootings in schools is a devastating condition, which proves that the matter at hand should not be trivialized. The number of guns owned should be reduced. The minor should not own the guns. The facts, objectives, and the analysis of the issue are compelling enough to the government and concerned authorities in order to contribute to the gun control fully.