Discussion Gun Control Issues

Security is an extremely risky debate among different people across the globe. In the case of gun control, there are opponents and proponents ready to discuss the motion to raise their grievances. This issue is extremely sensitive because it touches all parts of human life both physical and emotional issues (Roleff n.p). For this reason, this discussion is taking two different paths depending on the form of argument. It is worth noting that both the proponents and the opponents have two different sides of arguments. The first part argues about the right of bearing firearms while the second part argues about the increase of injuries and crimes.
The first part of the discussion is devoted to the right to bear firearms. The proponents to this arguments state that people have the right to protect themselves. This is where they argue that one of the most sufficient ways of protecting themselves is the availability of guns in their possession (Blain n.p). Although the opponents might argue that such availability will result into possessing guns by criminals, proponents argue that it is the most efficient solution of protecting oneself against gun attacks.
On the contrary, opponents of gun control argue that it is not secure to provide different people with guns for protection. The firearms may be found in the wrong hands. First, people will tend to use guns to settle their own personal problems while others will not have the necessary training required for the usage of these guns. Presently, the levels of unemployment will raise and will lead to insecurity (Roleff n.p). This means that people will have the necessary tools to commit criminal activities.
The second part of the discussion is the increase of injury or prevention of crime. In this situation, the proponents of the argument state that when people have guns in their possession the rate of injuries and death is reduced (Blain n.p). This is because people can protect themselves from any crime attacks. Additionally, they argue that providing individual people with guns reduces the rate of crime since people can protect themselves. They base the facts that a criminal will always be a criminal and good person will always be good (Blain n.p). Therefore, providing a good person with a gun will reduce the rate of attacks from a criminal.
On the other hand, the opponents state that providing more guns to the people will increase crime, injuries and death rates in the society. For instance, people are going to use these guns to settle their own personal scores. An excellent example is the Columbine High School in Colorado where a student turned on his fellow schoolmates and started killing them (Roleff n.p). This was possible because of the availability of guns in the society. This means that there will increase in crime rate if people are provided with guns. Moreover, these crimes will cause injuries and many deaths in the society.
Gun control is extremely a sensitive argument in the society. This is because there are those people who will always support this motion and those who oppose this motion. However, irrespective of the side of the argument, the motion of gun control falls on two categories. The first side is the right to bear firearms. If people possess guns, they can protect themselves from any harm, but, the guns might be possessed by wrong people. The other part is a reduction of injuries, deaths and crimes in the society. Availability of guns help to protect people, but it might also increase crimes if people use guns for their own personal vendetta.

Works Cited
Blain, M. “Gun control”. Police Review, 118.6085 (2010); 18-19.
Roleff, L. Gun control. Detroit: Greenhaven Press. Print