There has been an increased interest to the problem of recent gun regulations in society and whether they are reasonable or not. Many people believe that gun restrictions are not the answers to address the existing problem effectively. Like most of the other social issues, some argumentative points should be taken into account as far as the problem of the gun control is concerned. Both sides have their moderate and more extremist supporters. However, even though from the beginning gun restrictions control have been used for the purpose to secure individuals’ safety, some strong opposite points of view should be taken into account.Order now
First of all, gun restrictions are direct violations of the second amendment. In fact, how can citizens stop the individuals with guns without using guns? Confiscation of everyone’s guns will create new issues in the problems of self-security. Any restrictive “collective right” threatens the individual liberties. One more case that should be taken into account is women’s rights. Because of the huge criminal violence directed against them, females use firearms ownership for self-defense. Thought the history, there are many cases when guns have been used for the defeating “bad guys.” The restrictions against one’s right to possess firearms contradict women’s right of self-protection. Hence, every citizen should be able to have guns to protect one’s life. These guns may not only save one’s life but also make sure that a person feels safe at own place. Also, every person should be able to protect one’s territory and family members from any form of violence.
Secondly, gun restrictions are not effective policies as one should not blame guns for killing people. It is individuals themselves who kill others. Hence, in case the guns are prohibited, people will find many other ways to harm others, including knives, hammers, and even bomb. Probably, it will only increase the percentage of deaths. The problem is more connected to one’s mental illness. One common example is the existing prohibitions that were supposed to stop consuming alcohol. If they did not stop individuals from buying and consuming alcoholic drinks, gun control would also not be able to prevent others from using guns for personal purposes. There are many other sophisticated and more effective approaches to secure effective gun control rather than just banning them.
The last argument against gun control is that it only will lead to illegal gun business and the appearance of black markets selling guns. These guns are most commonly used by criminals. Hence, gun control would not solve the issue from a long-term perspective mainly because it is impossible to control every member of society who has guns. In case people have no official permission to buy guns for self-protection, there will be many black markets or platforms on the Internet that will sell guns. Ironically, the evidence demonstrates that primarily the countries with severer gun control have more cases of illegal gun selling. It is an ineffective policy as it will only lead to higher levels of gun violence, contrary to what one may think. In fact, any weapons are mainly manufactured by board companies before they fall into the wrong hands. Probably, it is much more effective to start with manufactures. First of all, any companies selling guns should secure that the customers are mentally healthy individuals who obey the laws. Some deeper examinations are needed before a person gets the right to buy a gun. Besides, every citizen should mindfully buy the guns and make sure that they are used only in extreme cases.