Controlling the trigger, not the weapon

Controlling the Trigger, Not the Weapon

To be controlled, or to not be controlled? That is the question that people have been asking about guns for years, and there still has been no true action for or against gun control. As Jeff Cooper once said, “The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness, by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles.” (Cooper) In short; guns don't kill people, people kill people. A gun in the hands of an evil man can be controlled through the actions of good men with guns. When it comes to gun control, there is no definitive answer because it is, to its core, a very opinionated debate. People believe that gun control will help solve everyone’s problems, but the truth is that taking guns away will not solve anything. Here’s something to keep in mind, if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. The government’s idea that have more gun control, stricter gun laws, and harsher punishments will help decrease the amount of gun-related crimes is completely off base and wrong. When guns were manufactured for the first time, they were used for military purposes exclusively. They then evolved into tools used to hunt and for competition. As these weapons became more popular, they were starting to be used for protection and destruction. One of the first documented school shootings occurred at the University of Texas in 1966 when a student names Charles Whitman climbed up a tower on campus and started shooting students; by the time he was killed by police, he had ended the lives of 14 victims. The first legislation regarding gun control came in the form of the National Firearms Act in 1934, this act taxed and mandated the registration of all fully automatic weapons, short barrel shotguns, and short barrel rifles. In 1990, the government passed a law called the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1990. This act severely limited where a person can legally carry a firearm, making it illegal for an armed citizen to be anywhere within one thousand feet within any school zone. The United States has about five percent of the total world population but residents of the United States own about forty two percent of all civilian-owned firearms. (Klec,) Total control over guns is completely unnecessary and unconstitutional, but there needs to be some sort of check when it comes to firearms. A lot of the public believes that guns should be completely outlawed and taken away from the citizens of the world. The strongest argument would have to be that by outlawing guns, the violence in the world will decrease exponentially. The problem with this argument is that if you make guns illegal, then the only people with guns will be the criminals who know they will be able to use these weapons without the worry of being confronted by law abiding citizens. As soon as guns are controlled to the point that only criminals can acquire them, then the law abiding citizens will not only be in danger, but more so than before guns were outlawed. One of the main topics on gun control is whether or not guns are an effective way of self-defense. Who is to say whether or not a gun is a good mean of self-defense or not? Well some of those questions are answered by the report done by a criminologist working at Florida State University. Gary Kleck researched data from the Department of Justice while at Florida State University. He taught those victims who have defended themselves with a handgun during a robbery or an assault, have the least chance of being injured, or the crime being finished out. Anti-gun advocates claim you don't need a gun to help save your life. “You can just try and escape, reason with the offender, or use physical resistance (other than a handgun), and that will work.”(Kleck) That is not true. Gary Kleck discovered by doing all of those things, there is actually a larger chance of injury and the crime being completed. (Kleck) These statistics are the same when it comes to burglaries. Most of the time when the victims resisted with a handgun, there was a less chance of the crime being committed or the victim being hurt. In Kleck's study only 33 percent of the surviving robbery victims were hurt, about 25 percent did not resist, and 17 percent who used a handgun, were injured. (Kleck) The same comes with assault victims. Of the 30 percent that survived with injury, 27 percent gave to resistance, and only 12 percent that resisted with a handgun were injured. (Kleck) There were no studies to be found that had anything to say against these statements. The major point that Kleck shows is that people are less likely to be injured when they defend themselves with a handgun, than do those who give no resistance at all. Another topic of frequent discussion is accidental gun injuries. Many anti-gun fanatics claim that accidental injuries are a major problem with guns. Again Gary Kleck says something different. He says they are actually very rare. In his estimation only 2 percent of fatal gun accidents occur during defensive gun use. He estimates only about 30 per year. There are about 2 million defensive gun uses each year, which would mean that fatal gun accidents are less than 1 in about 65,000. (Kleck) Anti-gun groups say to make the gun childproof. But according to Timothy Wheeler it is almost impossible to do so without making it useless to the owner. (Wheeler) There is no way to childproof weapons completely. The most effective way of childproofing is safety education. There are special classes that you can enroll your child in to help ensure safety. (Wheeler) They teach the correct way to handle and shoot a gun. (Wheeler). The percentage of felons who have had an occurrence with an armed victim and have been scared off and not finished their crime is a lot larger than most think. 34 percent of felons said they have been run off, shot at, wounded, or captured by a victim with a handgun. About 69 percent say that they know a criminal who has also been scared off because of an armed victim. Also about 57 percent say that they are more worried about meeting up with an armed person than they are about running into the police. A lot of the time people are told how bad the violent death rates are. The Los Angeles Times reports that there are over 34,000 gun deaths in the U.S. A lot of these articles are written by people who are against guns, so they make sure they do not give the entire truth. (Wheeler) They try to make guns sound a lot worse than they really are. For instance in the Los Angeles Times, the forget to tell everyone that over half of those are actually suicides. (Wheeler). This is how it usually is with the anti-gun groups. They only tell part of the story and do not add all of the details. It only tells you that since 1970 the number of guns has been increasing, but they forget to tell you that the homicide rates have not been going up. (Wheeler) Also the percentage of people owning guns has declined from 49 percent to 40 percent, but the violent crimes have fluctuated. So in fact The number of gun owners does not affect how many crimes are committed. Another report says that guns are about 43 more likely to kill family members than to kill a criminal. But they leave out that of those 43 deaths, 86 percent (37) were suicides. (Wheeler) The gun war has been going on for years. Every person has a different point on how guns should be dealt with. Ever since the beginning of man the constitution says that we have the right to keep and bear arms. People will always be trying to get rid of handguns, and there will always be people that will be fighting to save them. No matter what is said there is one quote from the National Rifle Association that should be remembered "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." The issue of gun control has no obvious solution. The accepted ideas about gun control change constantly and are greatly influenced by events in society. These attitudes also span a wide range with different beliefs and opinions, all of which combat each other. The future of this issue is a future full of compromise and many legal battles. Gun control will never have a real winner on either side of the argument; the only way to make gun control work the best for everyone is through compromise. The chances of compromise are very slim considering the stubbornness of most leading viewpoints concerning the limitations of firearms and background checks. Organizations like the NRA want to protect the constitutional rights of gun owners, but they need to compromise with anti-firearms activists to allow background checks. There are many other things that can help with compromise within this issue. There could be laws requiring proper gun education before purchasing a firearm and gun locks for families with small children or any children at all. Another way to help society is to change the mentality about guns; the public needs to realize that guns don’t cause shootings, people do. People with guns are the root of the problem and most of the population doesn’t understand this, which needs to change so legislation can move forward. Changing the attitude towards guns is the first step in preventing shootings like the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting and the Columbine massacre. Gun control is a very black and white subject with many ideas and opinions about how it should be handled, but the one thing that both sides agree on is that legislation needs to change. This is a very personal issue for many people here in the United States and it needs to be handled with care and respect. Success through compromise does seem far off and difficult, but it can be achieved by hard work and time. Both sides have similar interests, to prevent tragedies like the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting and the Columbine massacre through new legislation.

Work cited