Introduction
Most American citizens have utilized guns legally since the country’s beginnings. However, the second amendment of the American Constitution was written before firearms reached their current technological level. The Second Amendment guarantees all US citizens the freedom to keep and bear firearms, which appeared reasonable when guns only shot one to two bullets per minute. Nevertheless, some modern firearms can fire up to 900 shots per minute and cause significant damage (Duchesne et al., 2022).
For five years, lawmakers and the public have debated the merits of stricter gun control measures. Due to the grave danger that firearms present to American citizens, more restrictive gun control regulations should be implemented. Several violent crimes in America can be traced back to individuals taking advantage of the current firearms rules. To prevent and lessen the frequency of mass shootings and other forms of community violence, the current gun laws in the United States need to be updated, made harsher, and regulated more intensely.
The Accessibility of Firearms
Restrictive gun control measures are warranted since pistols and assault rifles are readily available today. On 14 February 2018, a shooting spree at a secondary school in Parkland, Florida, captured the nation’s attention. Although gun violence has long been a problem, it is worsening (Galea & Abdalla, 2022). Attributable to the lethal potential of firearms, more stringent regulations are needed to reduce gun violence and preserve lives.
One solution could be to increase the minimum age at which firearms can be purchased. Since it is critical to understand a potential gun possessor’s psychological wellness, enforcing mental health tests to detect any disorder may be necessary. Safety and security measures for firearms, alongside regulating unlawful gun sales, would be beneficial.
The Risk of Gun Theft
There is a need for restraining gun laws as an armed populace makes it simpler for firearms to be swindled and get into criminal hands. The more freely available guns are to civilians, the easier it is for people of varying backgrounds to obtain and use them. Certain people should be denied access to firearms because they pose an extreme danger to society simply by being armed. These people encompass terrorists, other criminals, and the mentally disturbed. Such people have carried out most mass shootings in the United States.
In recent years, illegal guns have been involved in almost 80% of all mass shootings in the United States (Reeping et al., 2022). The vast majority of criminals’ firearms are in their hands unlawfully. People with permits to carry concealed weapons are unlikely to utilize them criminally, but those weapons are more likely to be illegally accessed and put to criminal use.
Counterargument
Some people might rightfully argue that strict gun control legislation may backfire and lead to a rise in the illegal trade of guns and other weapons. As a result, if gun sales go up, criminals will have more incentive to buy guns on the black market, leading to a rise in illegal activity and trade (Galea & Abdalla, 2022). However, this strategy cannot fail and effectively reduces violence and crime. States are responsible for enacting legislation that enables them to engage at the local level to mitigate and prevent instances of gun violence that occur in individuals’ everyday existence. Failure to implement stringent regulations about ownership and utilization of firearms in the context of enduring gun violence may violate the government’s responsibilities as outlined in international human rights legislation.
Conclusion
To mitigate the occurrence of mass shootings and other crimes, it is imperative to revise the existing gun legislation in the United States while implementing more rigorous regulatory measures. One potential action entails raising the minimum age requirement for firearm acquisition. The implementation of more stringent gun control measures has the potential to alleviate instances of violence and criminal activities. Although critics argue that it is crucial to acknowledge the possibility of unintended consequences, whereby restrictive laws may inadvertently result in an upsurge in the illicit trafficking of firearms, government measures effectively thwart such occurrences.
References
Duchesne, J., Taghavi, S., Toraih, E., Simpson, J. T., & Tatum, D. (2022). State gun law grades and impact on mass shooting event incidence: An 8-year analysis. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 234(4), 645-651. Web.
Galea, S., & Abdalla, S. M. (2022). State firearm laws and firearm-related mortality and morbidity. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 328(12), 1189-1190. Web.
Reeping, P. M., Klarevas, L., Rajan, S., Rowhani-Rahbar, A., Heinze, J., Zeoli, A. M., Goyal, K., Zimmerman, M. A., & Branas, C. C. (2022). State firearm laws, gun ownership, and K-12 school shootings: Implications for school safety. Journal of School Violence, 21(2), 132-146. Web.