Arguments for Banning Assault Weapons

Assault Weapons Should Be Banned

With popularized interests, gun control and their laws have currently been one of the most talked-about subjects in the United States. The  debatable background includes a side who represent  strong political beliefs on the  privileged rights for  weapon holders.   Then,  there are opposers who factualize these  lawful privileges in  what has been the contribution of many and recent events that resulted in deaths through attacks.  Those who are for guns, assert that it “is our right to bear arms according to the 2nd amendment”(Butkus,2014) .  Where as those who are against guns, believe that having a weapon doesn’t justify the necessary feeling of  security and that  it causes more violence for those that don’t actually own a weapon or bear arms. Today , there are lots of people who carry guns at their waist in the holder , ready to shoot at the earliest  sign of feeling  like their  in an unsafe situation. But by doing so, it creates a hostile environment for everyone .  Members of the public who carry guns risk escalating everyday disagreements into public shootouts, especially in places where disputes frequently occur, such as in bars, at sporting events, or in traffic.

Simply put, It’s like making the statement  the fact that you’re able to cause harm but without saying so and that causes tension between people who do carry and those who don’t . So if everyone feels the need to have a way of protecting themselves, who is safe?  Assault weapons, in particular, are lethal having caused too many deaths and injuries here in America and the government should take  lawful action in order to ban the ownership of an assault weapon. Banning assault weapons must be put into place because the number of crimes committed with assault weapons is too great to ignore, it will lower the occurrences of public slayings and because we the people support the movement.

To start with , the FireArm Industry contributes to the crime rate by  providing educational and informational advice to gunman’s themselves.  Justifiers  within the Firearm Industry who say lives lost from criminal activities like robberies, murder and public shootings that have included the use of a firearm  try offering the advice that educational efforts are so  effective that  guns are surely being kept out of the wrong hands. Larry Keane, Senior Vice President and General Counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation supports the  belief that educating gun owners about safety is high on the  priority list. He believes  proper  storage ,  locking away  their weapon along with teaching retailers on how to spot a straw purchaser (a firearm purchased through someone who can rather than someone who can’t for possible reasons other than protection use) all work in the sense of keeping guns out of the wrong hands . Upon successful completion of  doing so, there would be no accidents and/or wouldn’t be misused(NSSF. 2014). With this being said, it is true that educating buyers on its high  importance of dangerous risks may lowers accidents ,however the buyer has already distinguished their intended purposes therefore  it cancels out anything the Firearm Industry teaches buyers because the owners of the weapon will use it however they please. This extent is  legally or illegally. To add, “spotting” a straw purchaser is ineffective as its purpose it to keep firearms out of the wrong hands but yet occurrences with gun involvement are still happening and that rate is on a steady increase. According to USLegal.com, the definition of a crime rate is a ratio linked between the number or crimes and the population fixed to that particular area. Simply put  crime rates are affected by crimes whereas  education has no link to crime rates seeing that it does not stop a criminal from purchasing a weapon or even committing a crime.

Get Help With Your Essay

If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
Find out more about our Essay Writing Service

The second amendment is contradicting ,creates confusion and should be altered in order to protect those without weapons.Politically , the abolishment of assault weapons infringes on the second amendment as it is being challenged by we , the people. As a piece to the whole United States Constitution document, the second amendment  is in fact written with the words “A well regulated militia ,being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,shall not be infringed”.  From my own analysis this meant that in general,an owner of any weapon is truly protected under law. With that in mind, initially the second amendment was constructed  in order to help people protect themselves against a tyrannical government so that they weren’t going to be overrun.  And this document had been written  in the 1700’s but of course times have changed. Instead, those who carry weapons are not on defense from  a   tyrannical government within this large amount of freedom  but now has been the contribution to many barbaric slayings that  has occurred. So this leads me to conclude the fact that “Carrying concealed weapons (“CCW”) in public creates unnecessary risks of intentional or accidental shootings.  In short if a holder of an assault weapon  isn’t  obeying this law (the second amendment)  then that considered should be  illegal since  the usage is no longer about protecting ourselves from the government or establishing militias because we have all of those things. But now it’s about the people’s protection from each other or people versus the people?  Easier said, we should just get rid of it. However  people  residing with the FireArm industry believe otherwise.

Professor Micheal Austin of Eastern Kentucky University has said in a personal correspondence that his proposal on the ban of assault weapons is  “ even if all guns were made illegal, that is, if Congress repealed the Second Amendment, many law-abiding individuals would still possess and use firearms in the United States”(Psychology Today , 2018) According to Austin, abolishing the ownership  of a firearm is uncalled for because if guns are outlawed, then many who are not outlaws will still have guns. For this cause, the effect  would be at greater risk of becoming victims with no effective way of protecting ourselves. He also adds that  his proposal is “not to abolish gun rights, but rather to make them less liberal so that those who should not have guns will have a more difficult time obtaining them”(Psychology Today ,2018). But given these points this is the job of law enforcement, and we should let trained professionals protect us.  By the same note, no one knows the exact intended purpose for the one buying the firearm but what we do know is that criminals will do what they please regardless of the law because criminals have no regards to the law. In addition, they look,dress,act and are in fact just  everyday people. All in all,  the FireArms Industry is just a business. It only makes business sense that the primary concern is not with whose hands are in guns, crime itself, it’s rates the people it affects since a business’s standpoint is only concerned with money by a way of  making profit. 

Military-grade weapons have no place in civilian life and are unnecessary for self-defense. Popular among mass shooters,  “assault weapons make a distinct threat to the safety and security of the American people and it makes it easier for deranged attackers to kill more people more quickly” (Delmonico , 2019). But If we  legally  make it possible to keep assault weapons out of citizens’ hands then instead we can lower the increasing occurrences of barbaric public slayings. Just recently, “22 people were killed and another 24 injured when an anti-immigrant gunman armed with an assault rifle attacked shoppers at an El Paso Walmart”(Danner , 2019). At a time earleir before at a High School in Littleton, Colorado, “two teens went on a shooting spree on April 20, 1999, killing 13 people and wounding more than 20 others before turning their guns on themselves and committing suicide”(History , 2009). Prompting a national debate on gun control and school safety,the Columbine shooting was, at the time, the worst high school shooting in U.S. history . To add in allegedly, these teens had gotten access to a firearm through a straw purchaser. Again I conclude to the fact that not only do spotting straw purchasers is ineffective but this is to prove that we really are unaware of any intentions of the buyer and this affects the well-being of everyone. If we keep assault weapons out of citizens hands then there lawfully, we look forward to having zero lives lost and politically, no debates about it . Thus how many more people must die in order to enforce the law on assault bans?

And having looked at how many citizens of the United States that support the ban on assault weapons is backed heavily by public opinion. The article was written by Domenico Montanaro named “Americans Largely Supports Gun Restrictions To ‘Do Something’ About Gun Violence” clarifies that the “public supports universal background checks for gun purchases, extreme risk protection orders (also called red flag laws), gun licensing, assault-weapons bans and bans on high-capacity magazines.” Since most support arises from democrats and independents, Republicans are not always on board with the movement.

Also, a National Podcasting by All Things Considered called “Gun Control Divides County Sheriffs” explains that National Sheriffs’ Association agrees” military-grade weapons have no place in civilian life and are unnecessary for self-defense”. So why aren’t we doing anything? What must we wait for something to change? 

Another reason to ban assault weapons include the human costs incurred by crimes committed with assault weapons are too great to ignore. “Reducing firearms Related Injuries “ is a brief article written by Renee Butkus who proposes the idea that Firearm violence is not only a criminal justice issue but also a public health threat too. Butkus introduces the fact that “A comprehensive, multifaceted approach is necessary to reduce the burden of firearm-related injuries and deaths on individuals, families, communities, and society in general. She states “strategies to reduce firearm violence will need to address culture, substance use and mental health, firearm safety, and reasonable regulation, consistent with the Second Amendment, to keep firearms out of the hands of persons who intend to use them to harm themselves and others, as well as measures to reduce mass casualties associated with certain types of firearms.” In addition to these studies, Giffords Law Center.org provides an informational outlook on how assault weapons impact humans negatively by killing us off provided that “Assault weapons have been used in many tragic, high-profile shootings, including of the nation’s most deadly mass shooting at the Route 91 Harvest Music Festival in Las Vegas in 2017, which left 58 dead and over 400 injured.” Other examples include the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida in 2016 (49 dead, 53 injured), 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut (28 dead, 2 injured),the 1999 Columbine High School massacre (15 dead, 24 injured), and the 1993 office shooting at the 101 California Street building in San Francisco (9 dead, 6 injured). A review of 62 mass shootings between 1982 and 2012 found that assault weapons were recovered in almost a quarter of them.”

Living on the edge and always being ready to retaliate under unsafe conditions isn’t fun for anyone. So the ban on assault weapons is important to those who do feel unsafe. When assessing this issue If we, the people, do not act upon this issue sooner there will continue to be a steady increase in more barbaric slayings. Deaths will still be on the rise and the world will become even more dangerous to live. We will never know what will happen next but we do know what is possible proven from today’s latest occurrences. The fact is that the future is never guaranteed. However, I believe everyone can contribute to making the world a little safer. We can conclude wanting to feel the comfort of safety that doesn’t include fighting bullets with bullets and violence with violence. I strongly believe everyone should work collectively to provide safety for themselves and their children without the usage of guns. With the help of lawmakers holders of assault weapons should surrender their dangers (the weapon) to complete the tasks of making the world (not perfect) but a safer place for everyone including them.

Works Cited

• “Another Reminder: Gun Control Doesn’t Prevent Crime.” NSSF, 11 Jan. 2018, https://www.nssf.org/gun-control-doesnt-prevent-crime/.
• Austin, Micheal. “Only Outlaws Will Have Guns?” Psychology Today. Sussex Publishers. 13 Aug. 2019 <https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/ethics-everyone/201803/only-outlaws-will-have-guns>.
• Butkus, Renee, Robert Doherty, and Hilary Daniel. “Reducing Firearm-Related Injuries and Deaths in the United States: Executive Summary of a Policy Position Paper From the American College of Physicians.” Annals of Internal Medicine. 17 June 2014. American College of Physicians. 13 Aug. 2019 <https://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/1860325/reducing-firearm-related-injuries-deaths-united-states-executive-summary-policy>.
• History.com Editors. “Columbine Shooting.” History.com. 09 Nov. 2009. A&E Television Networks. 13 Aug. 2019 <https://www.history.com/topics/1990s/columbine-high-school-shootings>.
• Montanaro, Domenico. “Americans Largely Support Gun Restrictions To ‘Do Something’ About Gun Violence.” NPR, NPR, 10 Aug. 2019, https://www.npr.org/2019/08/10/749792493/americans-largely-support-gun-restrictions-to-do-something-about-gun-violence.
• Kolenc/Twitter, Vic. “Everything We Know About the El Paso Walmart Massacre.” Intelligencer, 7 Aug. 2019, http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/08/everything-we-know-about-the-el-paso-walmart-shooting.html.
• Moorhouse, John C., and Brent Wanner. “Gun Control Laws Do Not Reduce Violent Crime.” Violence, edited by Louise Gerdes, Greenhaven Press, 2008. Opposing Viewpoints. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, https://link-gale-com.ezproxy-h.pierce.ctc.edu/apps/doc/EJ3010171250/OVIC?u=puya65247&sid=OVIC&xid=60a479b9. Accessed 12 Aug. 2019. Originally published as “Does Gun Control Reduce Crime or Does Crime Increase Gun Control?” Cato Journal, vol. 26, Winter 2006, pp. 103-122.