Ryan Benjamin
English Composition I (ENG 100)
Professor Mangini
Formal Assignment #3: Research Project, Draft # 1
Gun Control
Today's world has so many issues, from the covid 19 outbreak all the way to simple squabbles such as angry neighbors. A prolific issue that has been a thorn in America’s side for a long time is the dispute over gun control. The dispute is about whether or not the average American should be allowed to own a variety of firearms. Those who are for gun control believe that the average American does not need high capacity military grade semi automatic rifles. These individuals argue that gun control is a safe and effective way to limit accidental deaths due to negligent discharges of a firearm. In addition, they feel that relaxed laws around gun control would allow those with ill intent easier access to guns that they could use to commit crimes. Those who are against gun control believe that is a violation of their Second Amendment rights to own and bear arms. They would argue that allowing citizens to own guns actually helps keep people safe by enabling an individual to defend themselves against robbery and home invasion. I believe that gun control laws should be more focused on the individual allowed to purchase them rather than the type of firearms an individual is allowed to own. More thorough background checks, including a psychiatric evaluation and the completion of a minimum number of hours of firearm training and safety classes, taught by state certified firearm instructors, should be required before someone is able to purchase a gun.
There are many people that argue against the right for a citizen to own military grade firearms. They would state that civilians do not need such advanced weapons for activities such as hunting or sports shooting. According to ProCon.org “The Second Amendment was written at a time when the most common arms were long rifles that had to be reloaded after every shot.” [1] A firearm that fires one shot at time would be sufficient and effective for most hunting purposes. In 1791, when the amendment was ratified, firearm technology had not yet advanced past the stages of flintlock rifles which were single shot only. These rifles required the user to manually load the next shot by hand which took even the most well trained soldiers more than twenty seconds to complete. Compared to today's most common rifles, even the slowest firing takes a mere second to be ready to fire the next round. It is understandable that back when the 2nd Amendment was written, it was not understood how far firearms would advance in the future. It is common sense that hunters and sports shooters do not need 30 rounds in order to kill a single deer or shoot a paper target.
Gun enthusiasts would argue that banning high powered semi-automatic rifles and
shotguns for the purposes of sport and hunting infringes on a citizen's right to own them. According to Procon.org, “The term 'assault weapon' was conjured up by anti-gun legislators to scare voters into thinking these firearms are something out of a horror movie” [1]. Calling these firearms ``assault weapons” paints a picture of war and extreme violence that simply isn’t true. As ProCon.org reports “The National Shooting Sports Foundation says that so-called ‘Assault Weapons’ are more often no less powerful than other hunting rifles.” [1] Power of the bullet being defined as the size, caliber, velocity, and penetration power. For example, two common rifle rounds are the American 5.56 Caliber round and the Russian 7.62 Caliber rifle round.The 5.56 rifle round has a much smaller projectile moving at a much greater speed giving it the ability to penetrate much further through body armor while doing less internal damage. The 7.62 round on the other hand, is a much bigger projectile moving at relatively slower speeds, however it does much more kinetic damage to the body. In fact, many of the assault weapons that are sold in the United States are used in sports shooting competitions and not to commit mass shootings. As a result, many people have misconceptions about firearms based on fear rather than fact and actual experience.
Another area of disagreement on gun control involves whether or not criminal and mental health background checks should be required before a person can buy a gun. Some gun enthusiasts may think that if states allowed people to buy guns without running a background check then access to firearms would become easier. They say this because there are many leading causes of death other than gun violence. For example, Procon.org found that “According to the CDC's "Leading Causes of Death Reports," between 1999 and 2013, Americans were 21.5 times more likely to die of heart disease (9,691,733 deaths); 18.7 times more likely to die of malignant tumors (8,458,868 deaths); and 2.4 times more likely to die of diabetes or 2.3 times more likely to die of Alzheimer's (1,080,298 and 1,053,207 respectively) than to die from a firearm (whether by accident, homicide, or suicide).” [1] Therefore, not as many resources should be placed into running background checks when their effect is limited on America’s death toll.
Although one can argue that there are several leading causes of death other than deaths due to gun violence, gun violence is one of the few things that people can actively prevent. An individual may not be able to control whether or not they contract a fatal disease, but control can be used in the decision of who should be allowed to purchase a firearm. When a background check is completed before a person is allowed to purchase a firearm, then that person might be flagged as a criminal or as someone who is mentally unstable, in which case that person should not have access to guns because that person’s actions may be unpredictable. Currently, people are not required to obtain a mental health clearance from a psychiatrist in order to purchase a firearm. I think that it would be very beneficial if the Federal Government required those who wished to purchase a firearm to have a mental health clearance from a state certified psychiatrist before being allowed to purchase a firearm. Requiring a mental health clearance before purchasing a firearm would help catch those that are mentally unstable and at risk of harming themselves or others. According to Rand Health Quarterly, “There is moderate evidence that background checks reduce firearm suicides and firearm homicides, as well as limited evidence that these policies can reduce overall suicide and violent crime rates.” [2]
Owning a gun is a tremendous responsibility and requires a sane mind and good judgement.
A problem that gun control advocates are facing is that there is still a legal way for people, including those with criminal backgrounds, to obtain a gun. The primary way for this to happen is for someone to purchase a gun from an unregistered dealer. Many of these unregistered dealers are private gun owners that sell their own guns that they no longer want and are not required to complete background checks before selling their guns. According to the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence “Federal Firearm Licensees (FFL’s) are individuals “engaged in the business” of selling guns and are required to register with and be licensed by the US government. They are also required to conduct instant criminal background checks on all gun buyers -and are prohibited from selling guns to convicted felons, domestic abusers, and juveniles.” [3] To help prevent guns from getting into the wrong hands,the Federal Government should mandate that all states require that background checks be completed on all firearm purchases whether sold by licensed and unlicensed sellers.
Another issue facing gun control is the argument that those who own firearms should be required to take a gun safety class and be issued a certificate showing that they completed this class in order to be allowed to purchase a firearm. According to Reuters reporter Carolyn Cristl,
“Three of the states (Connecticut, Massachusetts and Rhode Island) require training before receiving a concealed carry permit, gun license or permit to purchase.” [4] Today anyone of age can purchase a firearm without the requirement of any training and oftentimes might be purchasing them just because they are cool and not because they might want to use them for target practice, sport shooting or hunting. This can result in negligent discharges of the firearm and unnecessary injuries and fatalities. “The process of adopting a cat is longer and more cumbersome than buying a gun.” [5] If people are required to be properly trained in the safe use of firearms, they would learn about things such as the importance of never pointing a gun at anything other than a target when sport shooting or intended animal when hunting. While learning about how to safely handle firearms is important, it would be beneficial for gun safety classes to provide education on other aspects of firearm safety. I think that Carolyn Crist put it best when she wrote “Most firearm safety courses cover basics such as safely loading and unloading a gun, but few instructors address suicide prevention, domestic violence or prevention of gun theft, according to a study focused on the U.S. Northeast.” [5]
In conclusion, gun violence in America is a serious issue, and changes do need to be made at the federal and state level in order for a compromise to be reached between gun rights activists and those who oppose them. Requiring thorough background checks, a completion of a mental health assessment and clearance from a certified Psychologist as well as requiring that potential gun owners complete a mandatory course on gun safety would go a long way to help resolve this issue.
Works Cited
English Composition I (ENG 100)
Professor Mangini
Formal Assignment #3: Research Project, Draft # 1
Gun Control
Today's world has so many issues, from the covid 19 outbreak all the way to simple squabbles such as angry neighbors. A prolific issue that has been a thorn in America’s side for a long time is the dispute over gun control. The dispute is about whether or not the average American should be allowed to own a variety of firearms. Those who are for gun control believe that the average American does not need high capacity military grade semi automatic rifles. These individuals argue that gun control is a safe and effective way to limit accidental deaths due to negligent discharges of a firearm. In addition, they feel that relaxed laws around gun control would allow those with ill intent easier access to guns that they could use to commit crimes. Those who are against gun control believe that is a violation of their Second Amendment rights to own and bear arms. They would argue that allowing citizens to own guns actually helps keep people safe by enabling an individual to defend themselves against robbery and home invasion. I believe that gun control laws should be more focused on the individual allowed to purchase them rather than the type of firearms an individual is allowed to own. More thorough background checks, including a psychiatric evaluation and the completion of a minimum number of hours of firearm training and safety classes, taught by state certified firearm instructors, should be required before someone is able to purchase a gun.
There are many people that argue against the right for a citizen to own military grade firearms. They would state that civilians do not need such advanced weapons for activities such as hunting or sports shooting. According to ProCon.org “The Second Amendment was written at a time when the most common arms were long rifles that had to be reloaded after every shot.” [1] A firearm that fires one shot at time would be sufficient and effective for most hunting purposes. In 1791, when the amendment was ratified, firearm technology had not yet advanced past the stages of flintlock rifles which were single shot only. These rifles required the user to manually load the next shot by hand which took even the most well trained soldiers more than twenty seconds to complete. Compared to today's most common rifles, even the slowest firing takes a mere second to be ready to fire the next round. It is understandable that back when the 2nd Amendment was written, it was not understood how far firearms would advance in the future. It is common sense that hunters and sports shooters do not need 30 rounds in order to kill a single deer or shoot a paper target.
Gun enthusiasts would argue that banning high powered semi-automatic rifles and
shotguns for the purposes of sport and hunting infringes on a citizen's right to own them. According to Procon.org, “The term 'assault weapon' was conjured up by anti-gun legislators to scare voters into thinking these firearms are something out of a horror movie” [1]. Calling these firearms ``assault weapons” paints a picture of war and extreme violence that simply isn’t true. As ProCon.org reports “The National Shooting Sports Foundation says that so-called ‘Assault Weapons’ are more often no less powerful than other hunting rifles.” [1] Power of the bullet being defined as the size, caliber, velocity, and penetration power. For example, two common rifle rounds are the American 5.56 Caliber round and the Russian 7.62 Caliber rifle round.The 5.56 rifle round has a much smaller projectile moving at a much greater speed giving it the ability to penetrate much further through body armor while doing less internal damage. The 7.62 round on the other hand, is a much bigger projectile moving at relatively slower speeds, however it does much more kinetic damage to the body. In fact, many of the assault weapons that are sold in the United States are used in sports shooting competitions and not to commit mass shootings. As a result, many people have misconceptions about firearms based on fear rather than fact and actual experience.
Another area of disagreement on gun control involves whether or not criminal and mental health background checks should be required before a person can buy a gun. Some gun enthusiasts may think that if states allowed people to buy guns without running a background check then access to firearms would become easier. They say this because there are many leading causes of death other than gun violence. For example, Procon.org found that “According to the CDC's "Leading Causes of Death Reports," between 1999 and 2013, Americans were 21.5 times more likely to die of heart disease (9,691,733 deaths); 18.7 times more likely to die of malignant tumors (8,458,868 deaths); and 2.4 times more likely to die of diabetes or 2.3 times more likely to die of Alzheimer's (1,080,298 and 1,053,207 respectively) than to die from a firearm (whether by accident, homicide, or suicide).” [1] Therefore, not as many resources should be placed into running background checks when their effect is limited on America’s death toll.
Although one can argue that there are several leading causes of death other than deaths due to gun violence, gun violence is one of the few things that people can actively prevent. An individual may not be able to control whether or not they contract a fatal disease, but control can be used in the decision of who should be allowed to purchase a firearm. When a background check is completed before a person is allowed to purchase a firearm, then that person might be flagged as a criminal or as someone who is mentally unstable, in which case that person should not have access to guns because that person’s actions may be unpredictable. Currently, people are not required to obtain a mental health clearance from a psychiatrist in order to purchase a firearm. I think that it would be very beneficial if the Federal Government required those who wished to purchase a firearm to have a mental health clearance from a state certified psychiatrist before being allowed to purchase a firearm. Requiring a mental health clearance before purchasing a firearm would help catch those that are mentally unstable and at risk of harming themselves or others. According to Rand Health Quarterly, “There is moderate evidence that background checks reduce firearm suicides and firearm homicides, as well as limited evidence that these policies can reduce overall suicide and violent crime rates.” [2]
Owning a gun is a tremendous responsibility and requires a sane mind and good judgement.
A problem that gun control advocates are facing is that there is still a legal way for people, including those with criminal backgrounds, to obtain a gun. The primary way for this to happen is for someone to purchase a gun from an unregistered dealer. Many of these unregistered dealers are private gun owners that sell their own guns that they no longer want and are not required to complete background checks before selling their guns. According to the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence “Federal Firearm Licensees (FFL’s) are individuals “engaged in the business” of selling guns and are required to register with and be licensed by the US government. They are also required to conduct instant criminal background checks on all gun buyers -and are prohibited from selling guns to convicted felons, domestic abusers, and juveniles.” [3] To help prevent guns from getting into the wrong hands,the Federal Government should mandate that all states require that background checks be completed on all firearm purchases whether sold by licensed and unlicensed sellers.
Another issue facing gun control is the argument that those who own firearms should be required to take a gun safety class and be issued a certificate showing that they completed this class in order to be allowed to purchase a firearm. According to Reuters reporter Carolyn Cristl,
“Three of the states (Connecticut, Massachusetts and Rhode Island) require training before receiving a concealed carry permit, gun license or permit to purchase.” [4] Today anyone of age can purchase a firearm without the requirement of any training and oftentimes might be purchasing them just because they are cool and not because they might want to use them for target practice, sport shooting or hunting. This can result in negligent discharges of the firearm and unnecessary injuries and fatalities. “The process of adopting a cat is longer and more cumbersome than buying a gun.” [5] If people are required to be properly trained in the safe use of firearms, they would learn about things such as the importance of never pointing a gun at anything other than a target when sport shooting or intended animal when hunting. While learning about how to safely handle firearms is important, it would be beneficial for gun safety classes to provide education on other aspects of firearm safety. I think that Carolyn Crist put it best when she wrote “Most firearm safety courses cover basics such as safely loading and unloading a gun, but few instructors address suicide prevention, domestic violence or prevention of gun theft, according to a study focused on the U.S. Northeast.” [5]
In conclusion, gun violence in America is a serious issue, and changes do need to be made at the federal and state level in order for a compromise to be reached between gun rights activists and those who oppose them. Requiring thorough background checks, a completion of a mental health assessment and clearance from a certified Psychologist as well as requiring that potential gun owners complete a mandatory course on gun safety would go a long way to help resolve this issue.
Works Cited
- “Pros & Cons - ProCon.org.” Gun Control, gun-control.procon.org/.
- Morrall, Andrew. “The Science of Gun Policy: A Critical Synthesis of Research Evidence on the Effects of Gun Policies in the United States.” Rand health quarterly vol. 8,1 5. 2 Aug. 2018
- “Gun Show Loophole FAQ.” The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, www.csgv.org/issues-archive/gun-show-loophole-faq/.
- Crist, Carolyn. “Gun Training Covers Many Safety Issues, but Not Some Major Ones.” Reuters, Thomson Reuters, 24 Oct. 2017, www.reuters.com/article/us-gun-safety-training/gun-training-covers-many-safety-issues-but-not-some-major-ones-idUSKBN1CT28N.
- Crist, Carolyn. “Gun Training Covers Many Safety Issues, but Not Some Major Ones.” Reuters, Thomson Reuters, 24 Oct. 2017, www.reuters.com/article/us-gun-safety-training/gun-training-covers-many-safety-issues-b