Gun Control in America

Who is more deserving of respect? Is it the American citizen or the United States government? These questions present themselves whenever the subject of gun control in America is raised. Answers to these questions continue to be the subject of countless debates up until now. The gun culture is almost like the American culture. Guns have and still are playing an important part in the public life of the American citizens. It remains to be portrayed in the movies. It is constantly the subject of newscasts. Several policies have been implemented concerning it.

While the subject remains to be debated, America has to pay the price of the fatalities that unfortunately, happens to be at the other end of the gun. Gun Control in America The culture in the United States somehow resembles that of a gun culture. This is so not just in the sense that millions of Americans own a gun but in a general sense that guns fill national debates regarding crime and are regularly shown in the news as well as in films. There had been countless times when the news report about shootings. There had been countless times when tragic accidental gun deaths were in the news.

These are the cases where armed men kill innocent victims. At other times, irresponsible gun owners engaged in drug wars kill each other. Times are there when gun shots are fired for purposes of self defense. There are occasions when the police fire a gun at criminals. Moreover, there had been too much news about killings performed with the aid of the gun during wars. In the United States, the public are drowned with images through the press and the television. The younger generation is fascinated by toy guns and computer war games. If truth be told, not most Americans do have a firsthand experience in handling the gun as a weapon.

In the police force, a great majority of the officers have never engaged in a gun fight with a suspect (Ludwig & Cook, 2003). For the majority, their image of the gun is influenced by what the newspapers, movies, and television present before them. The country has the most lawfully and heavily armed private citizens all over the world. As opposed to general non-American stereotypes, America is not deficient in terms of gun laws. In point of fact, more than 20,000 laws regarding ownership have been enacted (Moorhouse & Wanner, 2006). However, the majority of these laws are local and national and not federal jurisdictions.

In addition, the general content of these policies is relatively weak and highly lenient. For instance, forty-two states presently permit the carrying of guns concealed whereas only four states limit to one the number of firearms that can be lawfully acquired by a person every month (Moorhouse & Wanner, 2006). The majority of the American citizens are in favor or more stringent gun control measures, particularly at the federal level. Nevertheless, gun rights groups have been particularly victorious beginning in the year 1968 in their attempts to minimize federal government infringement of the constitutional right to bear arms.

In part, this is due to a unique American gun culture as well as to the function of the Second Amendment to the constitution of the United States of America. The latter, in particular, is generally yet mistakenly regarded to forbid stringent gun control policies being implemented. However, even though both these factors are crucial, opposition to British-inspired gun bans is more directly a result of the dominant political influence of well-organized and sophisticated gun rights group like the National Rifle Association or the NRA.

Working in a candidate-oriented and divided system of administration wherein elected officials are normally reluctant to risk on controversial issues like gun regulation, the NRA together with its gun rights allies appear to be threatening forces to majority of the elected officials. The interest group universe on gun control is greatly tilted toward gun rights groups that at present are disputed merely by a generally passive pro-control mass American public as well as by a comparatively inadequately resourced firearms regulation petition (True, 1994).

The gun politics in the United States remains to be unfailingly emotive, divisive, and controversial not just for the reason that it includes many of the fundamental features of the country’s divided democracy more generally, the proper function of the government agencies as well as the state in controlling individual behavior, federalism, civil liberties, individual rights, and the Constitution.

Outside the country, common notion, significantly stimulated by American television, films, books, and popular music generally imply that the United States have an overload of firearms, a lack of laws regulating them, and a citizen that is either deliberately blind to or unaware of the major public health risk of gun violence as well as the appeal of more restraining firearms control. There is a lack of reliable figures giving the exact number of guns in circulation inside the country.

However, most statistics imply that almost as many guns presently exist as people in the country, or perhaps even more (Moorhouse & Wanner, 2006). In the year 2000, about 250 million guns have been calculated as existing in the country (Moorhouse & Wanner, 2006). Hence, by any standards, the United States is unique in the sense that guns clearly constitute a common part of the structure of public life. Firearms are fundamental and conventional rather than an unusual and insignificant aspect of contemporary America.

Sadly, the images from the newspaper and the movies are usually misleading or partial due to the exaggeration and sensationalism normally used to advertise entertainment and news. Even while they are normally tilted toward the dramatic, news accounts expose the way the criminal mind works. Felons are motivated by self-defense (Vizzard, 2000). In this light, handguns may post as a hindrance. The possible protecting nature of the gun is more verified by the different rates of the so-called hot burglaries wherein an occupant is inside the home the moment the felon attacks (Vizzard, 2000).

As a group, felons are likely to behave rationally. Whenever crimes become more complicated, lesser crimes are executed (Lott, 2003). Higher conviction and arrest rates significantly lessen crimes. In addition, felons leave areas wherein criminal prevention spreads. However, felons act in response to not only the measures employed by the courts as well as by the police force. Concerned citizens can likewise exercise private measures which can similarly prevent crimes from happening. Permitting citizens to bear concealed handguns lessens heinous crimes.

Moreover, the declines correspond quite closely with the number of concealed handgun permits handed out. Whenever law-abiding citizens are permitted to bear concealed handguns, mass shootings in public areas are lessened (Jacobs, 2000). Nonetheless, a drop in the crime rates was not present in all of the crime classifications (Moorhouse & Wanner, 2006). Permitting concealed handguns may cause insignificant rises in auto theft and robbery incidents. Whenever possible victims are able to supply themselves with weapons, certain felons avoid from crimes such as larceny which involves direct confrontations.

Instead, they engage in crimes like auto theft wherein the possibility of direct contact with their potential victims is minor (Moorhouse & Wanner, 2006). Other surprises similarly emerge. Although the support for the most stringent gun control laws is generally most intense in big cities, the biggest decline in violent crime involving legalized concealed handgun took place in the most urban nations which has the highest crime rates and largest number of inhabitants (Moorhouse & Wanner, 2006).

Guns likewise seem to be the absolute equalizer between the male and the female. Murder rates drop whenever either more males than females bear concealed handguns (Ludwig & Cook, 2003). However, the effect is particularly distinct for the male counterpart. The reason for this is that letting a female protect herself aided by a concealed handgun generates a more significant change in her capacity to protect herself from harm as opposed to the change produced by making a handgun available to a man (Ludwig & Cook, 2003).

Gun Control and the Media Owners of firearms normally claim that the American press is partial in support of gun control (Kopel, 1988). Pointing out factual errors in particular stories is easy to do for the opponents of gun control. However, it will be hard to provide evidence for more systematic partiality (Jacobs, 2000). Tradition as well as history has influenced the country to depend on the gun. The country’s culture promotes a laid-back approach toward the gun, and the citizens own a legacy of the equipped and sovereign American.

The protagonist in the movies as well as in television shows is the person who is armed with the gun. Exposed to and has grown accustomed to the presence of guns, entertained by a performance which portrays the gun as an alluring device of individual justice, several Americans underestimate the effects of widespread accessibility of the gun. There are more than a few concerns regarding the current status of gun control in the United States.

Comparable to death penalty, abortion, as well as some other relevant issues, there is no practically accurate position which may be established regarding the subject of gun control. Both supporters and opponent of gun control give numerous compelling arguments to sustain their position. Nonetheless, even while the discussions on the issue of gun control question who is right and who is wrong, several innocent fatalities find themselves paying the price of their lives simply for the reason that they happen to be at the other end of the gun. Gun Control and the Government