Anonymous asked in Education & ReferenceHomework Help · 7 years ago

i need advice for my essay and if it is ok?

here it is

In 1998, 30,708 deaths were caused by firearms in the United States. Of that number,

12,102 were murders, 17,424 were suicides, 366 were accidents, 316 had unknown

reasons, and only 154 were confirmed to be in self-defense. Guns are currently being

used in this society for murders, celebration, hunting and gang activity. Guns are used in

the drill team, for war and by the police force. Guns should not be used in such ways

where others could be harmed or killed. They should be used only for self-defense to

protect themselves and their valuables, not as weapons to take other's lives.

The Gun Owners Foundation says that guns save more lives than they take and prevent

more injuries than they inflict. However, that is very untrue. The usage of guns for self

defense to not self-defense ratio is 1:22. For every time a gun is used in self-defense,

there are 22 shootings that are not. Also, gun violence costs the nation about one hundred

billion dollars a year. Eighty per cent of the money used to treat firearm injuries comes

from taxpayer dollars.

The Gun Owners Foundation says that criminals avoid armed citizens. A law in a city in

Florida that required at least one gun in every household caused the crime rate in that city

to drop 89%. Another law that permitted the carrying of concealed weapons dropped the

homicide rate by 36%. But having a gun in a household raises the risk of a homicide or

suicide. A household with a gun is three times more likely to have a homicide using a

gun and five times more likely to have a suicide using a gun. Suicide is not a crime, but it

is still a death and is just as bad. Guns are clearly dangerous, no matter how they are

used. Even though a household may have a gun, the head of the household may not be

trained in using a gun, and may cause an accidental shooting.

The Gun Owners Foundation also says that gun control such as the Brady Bill, is not the

answer and it doesn't reduce the number of violent crimes; therefore, its members do not

want strict gun control laws. The Brady Bill requires a five-day waiting period and

extensive background check on the person wanting to buy a gun before he or she is

allowed to have one. This should prevent criminals from having a gun in their hands, but

it really doesn't. There are about 192 million privately owned guns in the United States,

65 million of which are handguns. An estimated 1 -3 million guns are illegally sold or

traded, meaning that criminals can still get their hands on a deadly firearm. What is

really needed is better and stricter gun control, not elimination of it.

Guns are very unsafe. Forty-three per cent of households with children have guns. One

in ten are loaded and only one in eight have the child safety lock. Not all parents are

stressing to keep their kids safe and away from guns where many accidents can happen.

Guns also take away many lives of young people. There were 1,409 teen suicides using a

gun and 1,671 teen murders. Those startling numbers should make parents aware of how

dangerous it is to have a gun where their child can get it.

Also, there have been many arguments about the Second Amendment where it says, "a

well regulated militia...the right of the people to keep and bear arms." People in favor of

guns say that it is their right to own and carry a weapon. Although the Second

Amendment does state "the right to keep and bear arms," it is taken out of context,

leaving out the important part about a well-regulated militia. The Second Amendment

states that it is the right for a militia to have weapons, not every one.

Guns pose a high danger in the world. Guns are necessary, and the positive values of a

gun are not great enough to balance out all the negative values they have. Guns take

lives, no doubt about it. There needs to be much stricter gun control laws that prevent

criminals from getting deadly weapons. They will certainly prevent much of the gun

violence committed. A world without guns except in the hands of law enforcers would

be a much safer place. Even though all crimes cannot be prevented, many lives will be


2 Answers

  • Anonymous
    7 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    If you do an in-depth search you will find that of the 12,102 murders you posted only a little over 8,000 of those were with a firearm, the rest were killed by some other object. many were justified homicide, by the police, and law abiding citizens. Another 56% was black on black homicide.

    Your claim that, "For every time a gun is used in self-defense,there are 22 shootings that are not." is untrue, Most self defense encounters, where the law abiding citizens has protected them selves with a firearm there is never a shot fired, and a grat many of those are never reported to the police.

    I see you are getting most of what you believe right out of the liberal gun control bigots handbook. You see most firearm owners are good upstanding citizens and carry their own insurance so if they are attack by a criminals their own insurance pays the bill not the government. So you see the eighty per cent of the money used to treat firearm injuries that comes from taxpayer dollars is to treat drug dealers that fight amongst themselves and other criminals that do most of all murders, and it is illegal for them to own a firearm already.

    I is completely untrue that having a firearm in a household raises the risk of a homicide or

    suicide, that is nothing but liberal gun control bigots propaganda.

    You saying a household with a gun is three times more likely to have a homicide using a

    gun, is like saying you are much more likely to drown in the middle of the ocean than you are in the middle of the Sahara desert. If there is no water you are not going to drown, if there is no gun you are not going to be shot, common sense. But if you had a firearm you might not be stabbed or beaten to death by some scumbag criminal.

    Of course firearm are clearly dangerous, they wouldn't be any good for protection if they were not dangerous. The firearm is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as for protection if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

    Stricter gun control, does nothing to reduce crime, all gun control does it make it harder for law abiding citizen to get firearms to protect themselves from the criminals that DO NOT abide by the laws. The only thing that will stop a bad guy with a firearm is a good guy with a firearm, and gun laws take the firearms out of the hands of the good guys.

    You claim that forty-three per cent of households with children have guns. One in ten are loaded and only one in eight have the child safety lock. Not all parents are stressing to keep their kids safe and away from guns where many accidents can happen. So explain why out of 80 million law abiding firearm owners, owning around 300 million firearms that their is only around 700 people die each year from and unintentional discharge?

    You claim a lot of suicides using a firearm, but why blame the firearm, if a person wants to kill themselves the firearm is not the only way they can do that.

    You are really screwed up on the Second Amendment, first off the Bill of Rights was written to protect the rights of the people, not the government. If you read the Second Amendment you will find that it gives one (well regulated militia) of the many reasons for the people to have the protected right to keep and bear arms, not the only reason. What is it you don't understand about "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall NOT be INFRINGED"?

    Again stricter gun control laws do nothing to reduce crime, what reduces crime is make the penalty fit the crime, if a person commits murder then they should be put to death the same way they murder to person they murdered. If a person robs a person they should be put on a rock pile and made to earn the money they stole and pay the person back what the robbed from them.

  • 7 years ago

    Darn. I kept hitting the thumbs up button and it would only let me give The Wolf one :(

    Yes, we live in an imperfect world. In a perfect world, criminals wouldn't use every advantage they could over their victims, governments wouldn't enslave their people and take their lives, we could all defend ourselves equally with our bare hands, and the aggressors who would take your property and the lives of ourselves and our families would play by fair rules. If they did, I probably wouldn't own a gun. But they don't, so I do. Police are really good at mopping up after the fact, but at the moment when you really need them, there's just you there, fighting for your life and the lives of your family members.

    Pick up a newspaper and actually read it sometime. Innocent people are being victimized and often killed by criminals all around you. Governments are killing their own people and ours is being all to quick to give our freedoms away. You owe every freedom that you have to those before you who won and defended those freedoms at the point of a gun. Don't be so foolish to believe otherwise.

    You've dug up lots of statistics, but from where? How unbiased was that source, huh? Spouting statistics without being informed about the whole story is lazy and being someone else's useful idiot. Think again and think often. Guns don't always make everyone safe, and yes, some people, actually very few, get hurt or hurt themselves unnecessarily with them. But the same is true with just about any useful tool we have. Any powerful tool not used responsibly, can be dangerous.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.