Describe Why Guns Should Be Banned In The United States (Essay Sample)

Name
Lecturer
Debate on ban on gun in America
Date
Debate on ban on gun in America
Introduction
Gun violence is one of the leading contributors to mortality rates in the United States. It is reported that around thirty-one thousand deaths are caused by gunshot wounds annually (Webster et al., 2). There are also around three hundred and thirty-seven thousand, nine hundred and sixty non-fatal injuries recorded yearly that results from gun shots wounds.
Gun problem in the United States has deteriorated over the years, homicides rates in the United States is seven times higher compared to twenty-two other high-income states in Europe combined. Firearm-related murder is at twenty percent higher compared to twenty-two high-income countries in Europe; this is as a result of easy accessibility to guns without proper control and regulation.
In December 2012, alone unlicensed gun holder walked into a sandy hook elementary school and went on a shooting spree killing twenty children and six staff members. The gunman known as Lanza had killed his mother before going on a shooting rampage. There was the public outcry with over fifty percent of Americans calling for a review of gun laws in the wake of an elementary school shooting. Guns should thus be banned in the United States as they contribute an increase in violence, high mortality rates, and general insecurity.
Discussion
In the aftermath of the horrific murder on June 17, 2015, President Obama sensationally claimed that someone who had premeditated murder was able to do so because he or she was able to lay his or her hand on readily available guns. He blamed the Congress for failing to approve gun control proposal (Kopel, 2015) .in rejoinder, Proponents of stricter gun laws have made it clear that continued accessibility to guns endangers the lives of unarmed civilians by increase civilians. In recent past cases of unlicensed gun holders holding schools, malls and public amenities to hostage has been on the rise the call for a stricter policy like a ban on firearm possession cannot be overemphasized on this ground.
Gun violence in the United States is at all-time high; this is attributed to the sloppy gun laws that are prevailing in the United States. Other than the causality and mortality, gun violence comes with an enormous economic price tag, costs associated with the violence are colossal. The cost of gun-related violence can be quantified regarding lost productivity, medical cost related to deaths and injuries. In 2005 alone, about thirty-two million dollars in expenses.
When analyzing effects of gun violence, supporters of stricter gun laws say one need to look past numbers into the psychological and emotional trauma associated with losing loved one. This factors cannot be quantified empirical, but they affect the productivity and societal wellbeing. Other than that gun violence hinders citizens from enjoying certain benefits such as higher property values in what is seen as both direct and indirect coin sequence of gun violence. Studies show that violent crimes reduce revenue collected by the local government to be used in addressing various citizen's needs. Reports put direct cost of gun violence per individual at three hundred and twenty-five dollars per resident (Shapiro, 21).
Possession of firearms is also risky in a family setting, households with guns also happen to be families with children, few parents stress protection of children from these weapons. Most of the times the guns are loaded and have no child safety locks. This has led to accidental deaths in these family. In a study conducted by Brady Center to prevent gun violence, the suicide rate among the American youth hit a 12 year high in 2013 and Most of the guns used belong to a family member. In the same year alone about eight hundred and seventy-six children aged ten to nineteen took their lives using a family firearm. Most of these deaths could have been prevented access to guns been not that easy. The reports also claim that states that registered high mortality rates also had high ownership rates.
Thus owning guns is directly related to potential fatality. While many families believe that having guns in their homes increases security, the truth is that having a gun in the home increases the chances of an accident. Statistics shows that suicide has overtaken homicide as the cause of death among youths after Moto vehicles, death by firearm was taken from a family member is at the center of this suicide.
In essence, proponents of stricter gun laws premise their argument on family safety, fatality rate, and violence. They argue that influx of gun brought about by the weak gun laws has led to numerous accidents within the families that own the guns. They also claim that violence cost the federal government and the economy a lot of money.
However, only forty-seven percent of Americans belong to the pro stricter legislation group (swift, par 2). Many Americans are against banning of guns arguing perpetrators of most crimes like the mass shooting in elementary school were isolated cases of the mentally ill individual that cannot be used to represent the general character of gun holder. According to congressional digest, it would be hard for law abiding gun owners to shoulder the blame for criminal groups and deranged criminals. Opposing views claim there the laws already in place is enough to control the gun market. They quote Brady (pg., 9) bill that requires a five-day waiting time and thorough background checks on individuals interested in buying guns.
While proponents of stricter gun laws use crime, violence and mortality statistics to argue their cases, anti-stricter gun law or rather a forty-seven percent who do not support banning of firearms faults the statistics claiming that there is no data give a definite causal relationship between guns and violence. For instance, there is no data that shows a decrease in some people shot and killed by semiautomatic guns in the period of (1994-2004). This time, guns semi-automatic guns were banned in the United States (national research council, p.48) lack of empirical support means the claim advanced by pro stricter rules are not substantive and cannot be used in policy development.
In recent conclusion massacres meted on the American school going kids and shoppers in malls has given impetus to pro stricter gun rules call for a ban on firearms in the United States. Those calling for the prohibition blames the ease by which the gun are accessible for increase violence and high mortality rates. However, anti-stricte...