Very valuable findings are provided in the National Rifle Association survey, which is a strong supporter of the gun ownership and constantly makes researches to prove that guns save more lives than threat them (Gun Control, 2007). John Lott in his book “More Guns, Less Crime” maintains that there is a direct relation between gun control legislation and crimes, in which law-abiding citizens suffered from criminals using guns. According to Lott the only possible way to solve this problem is to provide the people with the right to own guns and establish higher penalties.
This work was incorporated comparison of data from different states of the USA, but was criticized for underestimation of other factors, such as peculiarities of the gun-related laws in particular states (Lott, 1998). Thus, based on the information discussed a conclusion can be made that guns should not be viewed only as means of violence and crime. In the world of violence guns could appear to be a valuable tool for a law-abiding citizen to protect his property and even life.
As it was proved in a number of researches stricter gun control policies can put the lives of ordinary people in danger due to the fact that they can appear unprotected against the armed criminals, who disregard laws and rules. One more question under discussion is how the government should establish stronger gun control. There are different methods of gun regulation, which comprise activities aiming at establishing barriers for gun purchase, sales regulating, improving safety of guns and others. One of the most prominent opponents to the federal gun regulations is the National Rifle Association (NRA).
Among the supporters of the gun control I can name Handgun Control also known as the Brady Center together with the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence. There is a lot of political argument on the topic of gun control, which can be roughly divided into several primary areas: ways, in which the government should establish gun control policies, whether stricter gun control policies are necessary, differences of legal basis concerning gun control among different states and political views of parties concerning this question.
Generally, all political gun-related arguments can be divided into two basic categories. The first category encompasses the questions of the right and authority of the government for gun regulation, the second one deals with the effectiveness of the public gun control policies (The Center for Responsive Politics, 2007). One of the most important legal bases of the gun control policies is the Second Amendment, which states that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed” (Bill of Rights, 2007).
However, the understanding of the Second Amendment differs. Gun rights proponents argue the Second Amendment grants the individual’s right to possess and carry guns. This meaning of the Second Amendment led to the fact that over 89 % of Americans are sure that their right to have a gun is constitutionally granted (Wright, 1981) Interpretation of the Second Amendment of the U. S. Constitution is also one of the most controversial points between the NRA and the Brandy Center.
While the first one considers that the Second Amendment represents the legal guarantee of right of the person to posses and carry guns, the latter questions this interpretation of the Second Amendment. Moreover, the NRA believes that intensification of the federal regulations infringes on individuals’ Constitutional rights and undermines the safety of law-abiding from criminals. The Brady Center argues that there is a direct connection between the number of guns and the level of gun-related death and in injury accidents (Gun Control II, 2007).