Gun control is a big subject in United States of America, it has always been an issue since the creation of the second amendment. But what really is gun control? “Gun control” is a broad term that covers any sort of restriction on what kinds of firearms can be sold and bought, who can possess or sell them, where and how they can be stored or carried, what duties a seller has to vet a buyer, and what obligations both the buyer and the seller have to report transactions to the government. Sometimes, the term is also used to cover related matters, like limits on types of ammunition and magazines, or technology, like the type that allows guns to fire only when gripped by their owners.
In recent years, gun control debates have focused primarily on background checks for buyers, allowing people to carry weapons in public, and whether to allow the possession of assault rifles, but with time there has been new restrictions like where you can carry guns and where not. The main problem about gun control is how people handle the guns, how they acquire them and how they use them, providing wrongful use of them is one of the most dangerous one and obviously the main problem that government is trying to regulate the use of guns into the United States. NRA official Web Page: The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) is a gun rights advocacy group based in The United States Founded in 1871, the group has informed its members about firearm-related legislation since 1934, and it has directly lobbied for and against firearms legislation since 1975.
Founded to advance rifle marksmanship, the NRA continues to teach firearm safety and competency. The organization also publishes several magazines and sponsors competitive marksmanship events. According to the NRA, it has nearly 5 million members as of December 2018, although that figure has not been independently confirmed. Observers and lawmakers see the NRA as one of the top three most influential lobbying groups in Washington D.C. The NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) it is lobbying arm, which manages its political action committee (PAC), the Political Victory Fund (PVF). Over its history the organization has influenced legislation, participated in or initiated lawsuits, and endorsed or opposed various candidates at local, state and federal levels.
The NRA has been criticized by gun control and gun rights advocacy groups, political commentators, and politicians. The organization has been the focus of intense criticism in the aftermath of high-profile shootings, such as the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting and the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting. The second amendment is not an unlimited right to own gun. The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: ‘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.’ This amendment has created a lot of controversy through the years, on one hand, some believe that the Amendment’s phrase ‘the right of the people to keep and bear Arms’ creates an individual constitutional right for citizens of the United States. Under this ‘individual right theory,’ the United States Constitution restricts bodies from prohibiting firearm possession, or at the very least, the Amendment renders prohibitory and restrictive regulation presumptively unconstitutional.
There is people that thinks that a well-regulated militia isn’t bad but it actually has a downside since you never know when a militia is going to turn against the government or just the people in general, take for example the FARC, it was a well-regulated militia from Colombia that it got to the time that they just turned against everything on their country and started doing operations off the grid and kidnaping people for years. Now, the collective rights theory of the second amendment say that citizens do not have an individual right to possess guns and other local states or legislatives power shouldn’t either.
We got to understand that people own guns for self-defense, there is people that owns guns and even like that they’ve never used it in their entire life. Just like we can purchase guns easily within three days of process, we have some restrictions such like realizing background checks, people can only possess a certain amount of bullets, people can purchase a rocket launcher but not the missiles, we can purchase grenades but we cannot purchase higher explosives like C-4. Thus, the effort the government has made to have more control over guns people still finds a way to obtain illegal weapons or simply pieces to build it themselves.
Anyone can be affected by firearm violence but in certain situations gun violence disproportionately impacts communities of color, women and other marginalized groups in society. The presence of firearms can make people feel threatened and fearful for their lives with severe and long-term psychological effects on individuals and whole communities. When people are afraid of gun violence, this can also have a negative impact on others behavior such as right to education or health care, sometimes they even are too afraid to attend schools or health facilities just because they are scared to jump into someone that is carrying a gun. CDC/ November 9, 2018: There was 572,537 total gun deaths between 1999 and 2016: 336,579 suicides (58.8% of total gun deaths); 213,175 homicides (37.2%); and 11,428 unintentional deaths (2.0%). Firearm homicides and suicides represent a continuing public health concern in the United States.
During 2015–2016, a total of 27,394 firearm homicides (including 3,224 [12%] among persons aged 10–19 years) and 44,955 firearm suicides (including 2,118 [5%] among persons aged 10–19 years) occurred among U.S. residents. This report updates an earlier report that provided statistics on firearm homicides and suicides in major metropolitan areas during 2006–2007 and 2009–2010, and places continued emphasis on youths, in recognition of the importance of early prevention efforts. Firearm homicide and suicide rates were determined for the 50 most populous U.S. metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) during 2012–2013 and 2015–2016 using mortality data from the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) and population data from the U.S. Census Bureau.
In contrast to the earlier report, which indicated that firearm homicide rates among persons of all ages had been declining both nationally and in large MSAs overall, current findings show that rates have returned to levels comparable to those observed during 2006–2007. The rates of firearm homicide among persons of all ages during 2015–2016 varied widely among the 50 largest MSAs, ranging from 1.1 (Providence-Warwick) to 16.6 (New Orleans-Metairie) per 100,000 residents per year. The rate for all large MSAs combined was 4.9, compared with a national rate of 4.4.
This represents an increase from 2012–2013, when the rate for large MSAs combined was 4.1 and the national rate was 3.7. Between 2012–2013 and 2015–2016, firearm homicide rates increased for 43 (86%) of the 50 large MSAs considered individually. Among youths, the firearm homicide rate for large MSAs combined was 4.7 during 2015–2016, compared with a national rate of 3.9. Similar to rates among persons of all ages, this represents an increase from 2012–2013, when the rate for large MSAs combined was 4.3 and the national rate was 3.4. Males accounted for approximately 85% of firearm homicide victims (all ages) during both reporting periods, for the 50 largest MSAs combined as well as nationally. Firearm suicide rates among persons of all ages during 2015–2016 also varied widely by large MSA, ranging from 1.5 (New York-Newark-Jersey City) to 13.5 (Oklahoma City) per 100,000 residents per year. The rate for large MSAs combined was 5.8, compared with a national rate of 7.7, representing an increase from 2012–2013, when the rate for large MSAs combined was 5.6 and the national rate was 7.4. Firearm suicide rates among youths remained much lower than those among all persons aged ≥10 years. The rate for this age group for large MSAs combined was 1.9 during 2015–2016, compared with a national rate of 2.5. This also represents an increase from 2012–2013, when the rate for large MSAs combined was 1.5 and the national rate was 2.1.
Similar to firearm homicides, males accounted for approximately 85% of firearm suicides (all ages) in both reporting periods, for the 50 largest MSAs combined and nationally. We know that these deaths are a predictable outcome of our country’s lack of political will to make a change and an underinvestment in prevention approaches that work. Through a public health approach that focuses on drawing from evidence and addressing the factors that increase or decrease the risk of gun violence, particularly in communities that are disproportionately impacted, we can save lives. Each time a major tragedy occurs, the discourse tends to focus on addressing a specific venue. In the wake of the deadly shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas School in Parkland, Florida on February 14, 2018, there is an understandable focus on school safety.
We strongly support broad engagement of community members, including young people and other survivors of gun violence, policymakers, and others, in insisting that schools be safe. We must also insist on that same level of safety for our places of worship, shopping malls, movie theaters, concert venues, nightclubs, workplaces, neighborhoods, and homes. We can do a data gathering and find that younger and older people is scared of guns, my parents as an example have thought me a lot about guns and how to react in situations, such as trying to calm the individual who possess the gun or simply try to create distractions and slowly walk away without doing anything that could trigger the individual. The recommendations below show that we can reduce a lot of fears and risks related to guns, broaden to address the underlying contributors to gun violence, and then address the prevention infrastructure necessary to ensure effectiveness.
We shouldn’t be afraid of going outside or to the mall just because we think that someone can start a shooting in public. I would include recommendations like classes to ensure that we continue to learn, innovate, and increase our impact over time about guns. The set of recommendations or one program or policy alone is not going to significantly reduce gun violence from one day to another, but rather, through comprehensive strategies, we can achieve safety in our homes, schools, and communities.