Introduction
Gun control infers a collection of legal policies that meant to govern possession of firearms by members of the public. The rationale of these policies vest in the Second Amendment of the US’ constitution, which empowers people to bear firearms for security purposes. The policy is, however, not ultimate as the Supreme Court upholds some restrictions such as the types of weapons that can be possessed and persons allowed to own firearms. Gun policy is one of the most controversial issues in the US. Some scholars and persons are attributing to its effectiveness in reducing mass shootings while others are arguing that it perpetrates mass killings. This paper will analyse why the US needs gun control and why it does not and give a rationale for the effectiveness of gun control in the US.
Effective gun control is needed in the US because it reduces the rate of gun-related deaths. From 1996 to 2016, gun deaths amounted to 572,537. The research concluded that death by homicide was the leading cause of gun deaths between this period (Masters, 2). However, studies have shown that background checks, which is one of the gun policies in the US, is effective in reducing up to 56.9% of gun deaths. As well, gun identification requirements policies are capable of reducing up to 82.5% of gun deaths while gun licensing is effective in reducing up to 14% of gun deaths (Masters, 3). There is evidence that links areas with lose gun policies to increased gun deaths in the US. It is thus logically proven that gun policy is effective in reducing gun deaths in the US.
The US needs more gun control since mass shootings which arise from illegal possession of firearms is still a major issue in the country. Three hundred and ninety-one mass shootings occurred in 2019 alone. For example, nine people died and 27 injured in Dayton, Ohio in 2019. The US has one of the highest records of gun deaths compared to other countries such as the UK. The reason behind this is that guns are easily accessible in the country, more instantly possessed illegally by the public. With gun control, it is possible to define the right persons and the right firearms that can be possessed by the public (Newman and Hartman, 1535). Controlling the possession and the type of firearms that can be possessed is one way that will reduce gun deaths in the country, which then confers to the effectiveness of gun control in reducing gun deaths in the US.
Conclusion
Gun control will reduce violent conflicts which are likely to occur considering the high level of domestic ferocity in the country. Without gun control, then it means that members of the public will have easy access to guns and firearms. According to research, weapons that are most likely to be used during conflicts are the ones that are close to the hand. The rationale shows that easy access to guns leads to increased violent conflicts since gun deaths often arise from arguments and fights. Gun control then means that people associated with violent attempts cannot possess guns (Luca, Malhotra and Poliquin, 6) . Consequently, the collective likelihood of gun death occurrence from domestic violence will fall in the country.
Alternatively, gun control does not prevent the possession of guns by criminals, and thus its application is ineffective in the US. For instance, 62 mass shootings occurred between 1982 and 2012 in the US. Out of this, 49 of these occurrences were carried out by legal owners of firearms. Studies related to these occurrences reveal that out of the 143 guns that the perpetrators owned, 75% were possessed legally according to the gun control policies (Fox, Alan and Levin, 9). Then, this shows that gun control does not have any social impact in the US; hence, it should not uphold to enhance social order. However, based on this analysis, gun control is effective in controlling gun deaths and thus should be empowered in the US.
