Need persuasive Essay fixed

Reyes | 2

Shameeka Reyes

Professor Richard Schultz

Financial Accounting, I (1189 ACC)

BANNING OF ASSAULT WEAPONS IN THE U.S.A.

Debates on legalization on the use, production, and possession of assault weapons have received diverse opinions in America. Assault weapon mainly refers to the semi-automatic rifles such as pistols that can accept detectable magazines. Activists have been arguing passionately on both sides of gun control and gun rights (Abrams, 2012). Again, the Advisory Council had been highly supportive of the Government measures to implement more effective monitoring and regulating of worldwide trade in weapons. Concerns have been raised from both civilians and military personnel over the misuse of firearms in crime and conflict areas. Further, the attempt to banning them does not prove an appropriate action. The production, sale, and possession of assault weapons for citizens and private based organizations should be banned in the U.S.A.

Accordingly, some of the tentative effects that will be encountered when civilians are left with the rights of possessing assault weapons may be positive or negative. The positive effects associated with possession of these weapons are diverse. First, banning the use of these weapons will reduce the crime rates reported in the nation. Based on this tenet, several human right activists and organizations have been supporting the initiative. It is because their usage is the key to the many killings happening in the nation since many assault weapons were found at most of the crime scenes (Jacobs, 2015). However, it is hard to distinguish between a criminal and a normal harmless civilian conducting these crimes making it possible for offenders to undertake criminal activities anonymously. The police were also in support of this since their work would be made easier to clearly track down the owners of the weapons in case of a crime if the rights to possess weapons were controlled.

Proponents argue that individuals who possess riffles are capable of conducting mass killings if their motives are ill driven. A good example is the massacre that occurred at the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. In this occurrence, the convict, Adam Lanza was able to shoot and kill almost twenty students as well as six more adults within a duration of five minutes where he used a .223 caliber M4 rifle with just 30-round ammunition magazines (Hubbard, 2015). It can be attributed to the result of private organizations and individuals being allowed to possess assault weapons. If the government had controlled how individuals owned and used the rifles they own, then this would not have happened. Besides, it can be supported by the reality of the events that occurred in the nation for a period of ten years between 1994 and 2004. The government barred the use of rifles and the tragedies of mass shootings also significantly dropped. Hence it is a crucial to have such restrictions done with an immediate effect.

On another instance, the Firearm Owners Protection of 1986 controlled the licensing and usage of the newly produced fully automatic rifles and weapons such as machine guns by the civilians. This stayed in place at the time and its implementation causing a significant decrease in the recorded number of killings conducted using these rifles (Weinberger et al., 2015). The board was able to identify the weapons used in any shooting since all guns were given a specific code helping to track them. Organizations owning such rifles were also able to be accountable for all the happenings that were conducted using weapons registered under their names as well as individuals. Use of rifles also promotes illegal businesses such as drugs peddling. It was because smugglers were able to use them to gain access to most restricted areas since the civilians were not able to stop them from getting into the places. Hence, these rules were of great help in reducing such occurrences for that period of ten years until the law became outdated.

Opponents believe that the ban of ownership of assault weapons should not be implemented because of various reasons. First, it is not justifiable to claim that all the killings conducted in the country are as a result of the possession of assault weapons by individuals and private organizations. It is because even after the implementation of the law banning the use of these weapons, the crime rates did not end (Siegel et al., 2017). It is the governments mandate to identify the culprits behind these killings but not just accuse private owners of rifles and guns. Besides, mass shootings were still recorded even after the law was passed because people already had weapons within their residences. It even made things more complicated because after a tragedy occurred; it was difficult to distinguish the killers since the law only allowed the police and military to own riffles leading to the perception that they were the ones behind the killings.

Moreover, the ban encourages increased use of the black-market weapons leading to more organized lethal deaths. If private organizations and individuals acquire weapons through illegal ways, it is possible for them to conduct crime without being noticed hence no one will be held accountable for such killings (Abrams, 2012). Therefore, the ban should not be implemented but only allow people to use them in an organized mode. This will allow people to be accountable for all the occurrences that happen in their vicinity as well as helping the police conduct their investigations well.

Overall, I believe that use and possession of assault weapons ought to be banned for private organizations as well as individuals. From the evidence provided in the discussion as presented by different human right activists, the ban can also be affected globally. Its implemented will reduce the crime rates experienced worldwide. The assault weapons which may have been allowed for use are capable of being tracked down and the owners being accountable in case an occurrence happens involving their weapons. However, the negative effects which come up as a result of the allowance of the use of such weapons are very great hence should not be ignored at all. Hence, it is advisable to implement these rules and restrict the use of assault weapons which will work towards reducing the crime rates in the future.

References

Abrams, D. (2012). Ending the Other Arms Race: An Argument for a Ban on Assault Weapons. Yale Law & Policy Review, 10(2), 488-519.

Jacobs, J. B. (2015). Why Ban Assault Weapons. Cardozo L. Rev., 37, 681.

Siegel, M., Pahn, M., Xuan, Z., Ross, C. S., Galea, S., Kalesan, B., & Goss, K. A. (2017). Firearm-related laws in all 50 US states, 1991–2016. American journal of public health, 107(7), 1122-1129

Weinberger, S. E., Hoyt, D. B., Lawrence, H. C., Levin, S., Henley, D. E., Alden, E. R., & Hubbard, W. C. (2015). Firearm-related injury and death in the United States: a call to action from 8 health professional organizations and the American Bar Association. Annals of internal medicine, 162(7), 513-516.

.