Anit Gun Control Essay, Research Paper

Should there be gun control? Do we the people

need help from the government to set guidelines and

bans out to keep us safe? If we did, would the prices

we pay surmount the desired results. No, gun control

is not a constitutionally sound device nor does it

protect us.

Gun control is not a new tool. In the past century it

was used repeatedly by great rulers/dictators.

However, these rulers used it as a tool to manipulate

and de-power a nations people. Before Hitler took

over and began his quest of racial cleansing, he

banned guns from all citizens. Do you think that the

stories of 2/3 of “euro-jews” being led to death

like sheep would have been the same if they were

armed? I do not. Mass gun control was also used by

Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao Tse Tung to de-arm

and put entire nations to sleep.

However, this could never happen to the United

States. Our founding fathers foresaw this and

enplaned a precautionary amendment into our

constitution. Thomas Jefferson had one of the

most intelligent views on gun control, he said “Laws

that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those

who are neither inclined nor

determined to commit crimes…Such laws make things

worse for

the assaulted and better for the assailants.” This is

why we

have a second amendment that gives us the right to

“bear arms.”

But have steps to violate this right already

been put

in motion? I think so. Waiting periods on buying

guns are

ridiculous. If someone who raped and beat you was

getting

out of jail, and that person promised to “re-visit”

you, would

you not like to aquire a gun the night you found out

they had

been paroled? I would. Also, should large and

sophisticated assault weapons

be available? Absolutely, yes. Weapons of this

caliber are

close to never used for criminal acts. Also, could

Sharon

Tate have fought off the Manson Family with a small

5 shot

pistol? No, any means we need to protect ourselves

should

be available, encouraged and without a doubt legal.

For example, Switzerland has introduced laws

requiring every house hold to contain at least one

fully

automatic assault rifle. To everyone’s surprise, the

murder rate

of Switzerland in substantially lower than that of the

United States.

Should we adopt such a radical life style? No,

but would something less extreme be bad?

Another myth on gun control is the false

study stating

that statistics show that a household gun will more

likely be

used to kill a family member than defend your home.

This test

is an embarrassment to modern statistical studies, it

is deceptiveand downright poorly executed. This

“test” only counted the number of family members

shot to that of burglars shot to death.

It “conveniently” neglected to count criminals

wounded by these

firearms, criminals scared of by the crack of the shot,

or even

potentially targeted houses left alone due to the

acquisition

of knowledge that the home contained a firearm.

When it all boils down, gun control is just a

bad idea.

It doesn’t even effect criminals who’s access to guns

will never

be infringed upon. How can we prevent potential law

breaking

people from getting guns with such a large black

market for firearms and such a great availability in

Mexico

and other nations of the world. Even if you did take

away

all the guns of the world, people would hold up

banks with

bombs, knives, bow’s and arrows, baseball bats, or

even an

long stale piece of French Bread. The way to

prevent such

crimes is find jobs for those people, and give them

role in

society. Are such laws needed when more people

will die

by drowning each year that death by a firearm?

(4,100

drowning lost lives to 900 gun related tragedies)

Should

we out law all liquids? Of course not, gun control is

wrong,

and should be promptly abolished.

Anti-Gun Control Essay

By Gabriel Ullrich

Period #7