Who Wants Gun Control in America

What are the Implications of Gun Control?

In the wake of recent mass shootings, the issue of gun control has once again come to the forefront of public debate. Proponents of gun control argue that it will help to reduce gun violence and make it more difficult for criminals to obtain firearms. However, opponents of gun control argue that it infringes on their 2nd Amendment right to bear arms and will not be effective in preventing gun violence. Rather than trying to ban all firearms, they argue that we should focus on improving background checks and increasing mental health services. The implications of gun control are complex and far-reaching, and the debate is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon. However, it is clear that the issue of gun control is one that is deeply dividing our country. This paper aims to show, though, that when it comes to gun control in America, people of all ages and backgrounds seem less concerned about mass shootings than they do about the government taking away their liberties—particularly in a post-COVID lockdowns world; and as a result they are more pro-gun than ever.

Opposing Views

The debate about gun control is one that has been going on for many years all around the world—not just in the US. There are those who feel that stricter gun laws are necessary in order to reduce the number of mass shootings that have become all too common in recent years. They point to countries in Europe, where guns have been banned (like England), and where gun violence is minimal as a result. Proponents of gun control also argue that the Second Amendment is outdated and was never meant to apply to modern firearms but rather was made part of the Constitution because of fears at the time that another attack on the sovereignty of the newly independent US could be imminent. Yet, with today’s law enforcement agencies, there is no need to have standing militias—the ultimate concept behind the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.

On the other side of the debate are those who believe that gun control measures will do nothing to reduce the number of mass shootings. They argue that criminals will always find a way to obtain firearms, no matter how strict the laws are. They also point out that many mass shooters have obtained their guns legally, so stricter background checks and other measures would not have stopped them. Furthermore, they believe that the right to bear arms is a fundamental right that should not be infringed upon. They see the 2nd Amendment as part of their cultural heritage and as the backbone of the identity as Americans. They fear that if their right to bear arms is taken from them, the government will become more draconian and authoritarian, and strip them of all their liberties in short order. In short, they believe that their guns are the only thing that stand between them and America becoming a totalitarian, authoritarian Communist country like China.

So clearly there is no easy answer when it comes to the issue of gun control. Both sides have valid arguments, and it is clear that this is an issue with no clear solution. What is certain is that the debate will continue for many years to come, as it really boils down to the consideration of extremes of either perspective. Logically speaking, both positions lead to very different outcomes and come with very different risks.

Research Perspectives

So authors recommend that gun control not be an either/or proposition but rather a case of degrees. For instance, LaFollette (2000) argues that gun control should focus on who owns guns, how they obtain them, where and how they store them, and where and how they can carry them” (p. 263). The idea that only certain people should have access to guns in certain places is one that gun control advocates in general support. However, it goes against the basic idea of being able to arm oneself anywhere at any time and is thus unlikely to gain much traction.

Other authors argue that guns save more lives than they take, and this is the position that Reid (2022) notes: pro-gun advocates see guns as a buffer between order and chaos. If there is an active-shooter situation, all it takes is someone who is armed on the scene to potentially end that situation. This is supported by reports like this one from Ruiz (2020) about a legally armed bystander killing a gunman who was in the middle of a fatal shooting spree. That legally armed individual saved more lives from potentially being lost. Had gun control laws been in effect, it is possible that the rampage might have continued. But of course gun control advocates argue that the rampage never would have happened in the first place (LaFollette, 2000).

There is also the view that gun control violates the 2nd Amendment right of Americans to bear arms (Wright, 1988). This country was founded on the principle of self-defense. The country’s leaders fought a war for independence and to give up their arms would have been to surrender. The same idea is still alive today for those who follow the Constitution. The moment Americans give up their guns is the moment they surrender to another power. As Buchanan (2000) puts it, it would be the end of the ethics-based rule of law that brought America into being.

Social Experiment Data

Table 1 depicts the demographics of the participants in this social experiment.

Table 1: Demographics of Participants

Participant

Age/Gender/Race

Occupation

Education

22/F/Black

Student

High School Diploma

27/F/White

Banker

Bachelor’s

34/F/Black

Teacher

Master’s

19/M/White

Student

High School Diploma

45/F/Hispanic

Doctor

Doctorate

52/M/White

Engineer

Bachelor’s

17/M/Black

Student

High school

33/M/White

Waiter

High School Diploma

68/F/White

Retired

Bachelor’s

72/M/White

Retired

High School Diploma

Overall, the table shows that a total of ten participants took place, ages ranging 17 to 72, with five of them male, and five of them female. 6 were white, 3 black, and 1 Hispanic. This represents a good slice of multi-cultural diversity in America.

The instrument administered was a survey of participants’ beliefs on gun control and associated issues.

Table 2: Beliefs

Question Number

Item Description

% Agree

% Disagree

Do you think racism still exists?

Do you believe in capital punishment?

Should stricter gun control measures be adopted?

Should gun control be left up to individual states?

Do you own a gun or would you own a gun?

Should people have the right to concealed carry at all times in all places?

Do you feel safer knowing that guns are allowed or not allowed in a place?

Name one thing you would like to change about society.

Less government

Government intervention is needed

Would gun control violate the 2nd Amendment and would that be important to you?

Additional Comments?

Guns save lives

Guns kill

Overall, the survey showed that people of all demographics and backgrounds tend to come together on the matter of gun control. The majority of respondents believed that they felt safer knowing that they or others could carry a gun in public. This finding is not surprising based on the research previously cited, which showed that people believe that that guns can be an effective way to deter crime. After all, criminals are less likely to target someone who is armed. In addition, guns can also help to equalize the playing field in instances of self-defense, giving individuals a fighting chance against larger and stronger attackers. As a result, it is not surprising that so many people feel safer when carrying a gun.

Results & Conclusion

The results were somewhat surprising, considering the diversity of the sample. The results showed more uniformity in thought in terms of pro-gun beliefs being linked to safety, rights, and fear of government. This perhaps could be accounted for by the location of the sample, or it could be due to genuine cultural beliefs in America that guns are helpful in saving lives. More research should be conducted to better understand the nature of these beliefs and how cultural factors influence them.