Gun Control Laws
Essays

Gun control is largely an ineffective and potentially discriminatory practice that infringes upon Constitutional rights. Supporters of gun control often argue that firearm ownership is linked to accidental deaths and…

An Analysis of the Need for More Sensible Gun Control Laws in the United States Today

Gun control has been a controversial topic of discussion in the United States ever since it was initially introduced in the 1920s. Conventional wisdom says that guns are responsible for violence and that they need to be…

The January 2010 shooting death of United States Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona was undoubtedly tragic. Many condolences have gone out to the families of the deceased, to their friends and to all of…

This paper examines the National Rifle Association, its role in the political landscape, and its position on gun ownership and laws impacting gun ownership. While the National Rifle Association is a controversial group because of its advocacy against any real restrictions on gun ownership, it has a number of supporters. This paper attempts to explain why so many people favor the policies advocated by the National Rifle Association.

An analysis meant to determine how illegal weapons influence crime rates

Smith & Wesson, one of the top handgun manufacturers in the United States, agreed to implement a number of safety reforms when faced with liability claims that could put the company out of business. In a deal with New York State, Connecticut, and several other large cities, Smith & Wesson agreed to childproof handguns and stop distributing firearms to dealers with a reputation for skirting the gun control laws. This essay describes the positions that the stakeholders took in the aftermath of this historic agreement.

According to the Second Amendment of United States Constitution "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." The…

Ethical egoism proposes that every person necessarily, naturally and morally acts out of self-interest. Thus, it is the very basis of all morality to do so. But most thinkers reject this theory because it conflicts with the tenets of an organized society. Gun ownership by law enforcers and select individuals is based on this theory. Everyone has the fundamental right to self-protection by often heavily armed attackers in this very perilous world and in these perilous times.

The objective of this study is to determine whether gun control laws will serve to bring about a reduction in the number of homicides in the United States. Toward this end this study will conduct an extensive review of literature in this area of inquiry. This study has reviewed the most pertinent published reports on the effectiveness of gun control laws on reducing murder rates. The findings in this study unequivocally show that bans on gun ownership do not reduce homicide rates and in fact, bans on gun ownership appear to be effective at just the opposite or that being that bans on gun ownership result in higher homicide rates. The rationale stated in the studies reviewed for this phenomenon is that individuals committing crimes are deterred from those crimes by the thought that the victim of the crime may likely be in possession of a gun to protect themselves, their family and their property and that this fact deters many would-be criminals. Findings in this study additionally include that bans on gun ownership does not reduce the numbers of criminals who own guns but reduces instead the numbers of law abiding citizens who own guns which would explain the rationale for the reduction of crimes in states that do not have bans on gun ownership. In other words, in states where gun ownership is banned, law abiding citizens will abide by the law and be without the advantage of the protection of a gun whereas criminals, who do not abide by the laws and who have no regards for what is or is not legal, will purchase guns off of the black market and own a gun despite bans on gun ownership. Therefore, the outcome of laws that ban gun ownership seem to be that the individuals who need the gun to protect themselves, their family and their property are left defenseless against the criminal element who will own guns regardless of any laws banning gun ownership. In light of these findings it would be ludicrous and even counterproductive in fighting crime to remove guns from the hands of the law abiding citizenry since they are the ones most in need of guns to protect themselves, their family and their property from criminals who are already in possession of and who will continue to ensure that they own guns despite laws to the contrary.