The effectiveness of gun control in united state of America (positive and negative effects)

Home › Free Essays › Gun Control › The effectiveness of gun control in united state of America (positive and negative effects)

The Effectiveness of Gun Control in the United States of America

In the recent years, the U.S. society has faced rather complicated issues that are to be solved even in a rather long and disputed way. Those issues include the right of abortion, euthanasia and free gun possessing. The author believes that free gun possessing surely has negative and positive effects. Though, to his mind, positive ones prevail. Here are some points to prove the above statement. According to CDC (Centers for Disease Control) (Cruz, 2013) (Adelmann, 2013):

1. Most of the deaths from firearms from 2000 to 2010 were suicides (about 60 % of the total). Total crimes with guns are around 300,000 a year;

2. Guns are used for self-defense from 500,000 to 3 million times a year;

3. The number of deaths in the massacre, as in Connecticut, is a small fraction of the total number that is shrinking;

4. The number of accidental deaths by careless handling of weapons is steadily declining. Moreover, it is less than one percent of all accidental deaths;

5. The effectiveness of control programs including the “background checks”, restrictions on weapons, and the penalties for illegal weapons has mixed results;

The number of murders with firearms is much higher than in any country with “high income”, but removing the statistics of Illinois, California, New Jersey and the city of Washington let assume the statistics on the remaining part will be at the level of world standards. There is rampant toughest gun control on these territories in the United States.

The U.S. President Barack Obama has officially proposed to the Congress to restrict the freedom to bear arms, in particular to return to a ban on the sale of automatic weapons and stores of large capacity and to inspect individual buyers. According to observers, the first attack of gun industry lobbyists was unsuccessful. Meanwhile, the state of New York adopted the law project that would tighten arms trafficking (Clark, 2013).

Many ordinary citizens have responded to the president’s proposal assaulting gun shops and buying guns, fearing that this is their last chance to get a weapon. Advertisements appeared on the shelves of gun shops in New York reporting that one customer can buy no more than 100 bullets of various calibers (Fox News, 2013).

The National Rifle Association (NSA) gave response to Obama’s proposals, which are believed to control some conservatives. In a 35-second video posted on the NSA website, representatives of the Association called Obama an “elitist hypocrite” and pointed out that his two daughters were under armed guard. “Are the children of the president are more important than yours?” ? the head of the NSA Wayne LaPierre refers to the audience (National Post, 2013). The White House did not fail restrained comment on this statement, calling it “disgusting and cowardly.”

Business related to weapons in the U.S. is huge. Incidentally, this is the only industry that was not affected by the crisis and showed growth. Many states are trying to lure the production in their areas. For example, in Idaho, the Republicans say, “Gun control means the use of both hands when shooting for us. We are always happy with producers that are willing to move here” (Hall, 2013).

In general, weapon production was quite advanced, and it contributed to the prosperity of many of its closest associates. Now the politicians who are seeking to impose more restrictions have to swirl, trying to prohibit citizens to bear guns. They also try to avoid conflicting with the producers; otherwise, they will move out the production, which will result in considerable losses. A recent example is the Magpul, an extremely eminent company, which plans to move a multimillion-dollar business out of Colorado after adopting the next populist prohibitions.

Overall, the sales of small arms in the U.S. continue to rise. Therefore, in November, the FBI has registered about 2 million identity checks of arms buyers. These checks are in the National System of immediate inspection of the United States (National Instant Criminal Background Check System, NICBCS) and are used to approximate the amount of purchased weapons. The November figure of 2,000,000 checks for 1 month was the highest in the history of statistics of the FBI (Enforcement Division. Brownells Inc. Company), which considers itself as one of the world’s largest suppliers of weapon and accessories to it, reported that over three days the sales volume of ammunition clips in the United States was as much as company normally sells within 3.5 years (Hsu, 2013).

A record demand for weapon led to shortages in the U.S. stores. The Americans, fearing the spread of restrictions on firearms, began to massively replenish their reserves. As a result, it became difficult to get hold of the most common items such as ammunition of 22 calibers. In addition, the price of guns doubled in some stores last year.

Meanwhile, the stores claim that athletes do not provide record demand by gun owners who replenish their stocks, fearing ban or tax increase. Vendors say that sales have gone up the mountain shortly after the re-election of President Barack Obama, whose administration is opposed to its proliferation, and there was a sharp jump on the background of active public debate about this issue.

According to the industry representatives, the American arms companies producing ammunitions are now working 24/7. There was no such a high demand for ammunition in the United States before. Rare calibers are only present in a few stores. The most popular and demanded of those are sold on request and on a first-come first-served basis only.

The police of the United States have registered at least 500 incidents due to the careless handling of firearms this year. Hunters, members of the law society, sellers of pistols and rifles, students, teenagers and even young children shot themselves. Numerous incidents, some of which resulted in death, made fans and foes of shooting talk about the need to tighten the rules for handling weapons.

Not reducing the trafficking of arms but rather reducing the number of zones that are free from it where to carry weapons is strictly forbidden to prevent mass shootings that occur in the United States. Such zones are a refuge for the maniacs. These are mainly schools, movie theaters, restaurants. So, schoolteachers and the security should be provided with firearms. A prime example is Israel, where in schools a single shot was not done since 1974, because there were armed men protecting the population.

There are cases where the crime falls after the legalization of weapons and, on the contrary, grows after being banned. It is obvious that the ban on weapons has not saved Canada from executions. In addition, why would it stop if people have nothing else to fight crime? The fact is that such restrictions can only disarm the law-abiding citizens, not criminals who will bear the gun in any way. In addition, international experience shows that criminals rarely use legal weapon, only one percent of cases. Usually, they are resorting to illegal weapons, which they have now as well.