Edit my essay

Armed self-defense is the most suitable way of stopping gun violence

Armed self-defense has been an issue that has been longstanding over the decades catching the heart of most people when there is an incidence involving gun violence that is aired by the media. It is possible to watch the news for several days and fail to note anything that concerns gun violence. However, in most cases when such an issue is reported it mostly invoices loss of lives or serious injuries on victims. The main question lies on whether licensed gun owners find it hard to observe the rules that are set out in the training or licensing procedure. According to Cudworth, 2019, many people feel that the fact that gun owners get involved in incidences of gun violence, it is essential that gun control procedures become more stringent to ensure that only those who truly deserve and those who proved beyond doubts that they could soberly handle firearms end up being licensed. Many cases of guns in the wrong hands causing deaths in schools and public entertainment joints have also created fears among members of the public (Felson & Eckert,2018). I believe the fact that people have been licensed to own firearms is not the problem and that armed self-defense is the best solution to gun violence.

The gun control laws put in place by both the federal government and individual state governments sufficiently cover the various issues concerning gun violence and only that there are loopholes in law enforcement creating paths for criminals to infiltrate the system. According to Dhanapala, Donowaki & Lumpe,2019, it is not possible that thousands of laws passed to regulate gun licensing and use in the USA have been unable to cover every possible aspect and scenario. The government should ensure that those who break the laws are prosecuted to avoid a case where a blanket punishment is enforced denying innocent people the chance to own guns rightfully. According to Goodman and Perry, 2018, making it hard for people to acquire guns legally will not prevent criminals from buying guns and therefore the issue of strict regulation will not be a solution.

When it becomes hard to get guns, there should also be enough security officers to make sure citizens are safe even in their residential places. However, this is not practical and therefore citizens who qualify and satisfy the vetting board should be allowed to own guns for self-defense. It is therefore essential to ensure that strict measures are taken on those who break laws. Those involved gun violence or any form of crime involving guns should be treated as criminals prosecuted accordingly. They should serve as examples to deter those with similar interests from committing such crimes. This will restore order in the use of firearms for self-defense and help citizens to choose their preferred way of securing their homes and themselves. Most arguments against self-defense lean on this issue of criminals being able to access guns when they are in the hands of civilians. It is not realistic to deny citizens the right to self-defense because criminals may get the guns, the government should enforce laws that relate to use of guns to avoid a case where unlicensed persons end up getting weapons. It is necessary to ensure that management of licensing bodies is changed to remove cartels who partner with corrupt officers to sneak in guns or get licenses for guns without satisfying the qualifications that have been put in place by law.

The United States of America has a long history of citizens owning guns for self-defense and this makes it a tradition. The use of firearms can be traced back many years ago and therefore, Americans have owned guns throughout history as stipulated in the Second Amendment and thus ending this right will not be a solution to gun violence. According to Goodman & Perry, 2018, Americans who are gun owners have participated in many incidences teaming up with security officers to help restore order during times of crimes. Therefore, this means that Americans are used to a situation where there is a gun owner in a family, and this is not taken as anything that might disturb peace in that family but instead a way of securing the family members and their property. Interfering with this right which is specified in the first amendment would make members of the public to react against the move and maybe stage demonstrations (Kamal & Burton, 2018). Denying people, the right to become rightful owners of guns would, therefore, be against their will and it could lead to more trouble.

However, those that argue against armed self-defense believe that having a gun n the family exposes your loved ones to danger. If anyone has a gun in the family and family members know where it is kept at any time, they may try to use it for fun when you are away, or they may use it when they are in anger. This is likely to cause a lot of damage including the death of family members. However, it is possible for gun owners to ensure that their guns are securely kept when they are not using them. This will ensure that there is no danger of family members accessing the weapon when the owner is not present.

Coming up with strict rules is not a long-term solution because current examples of areas where strict gun laws are in place do not show a significant reduction in the number of crimes involving guns. According to Goodman & Perry, 2018, New York city still has a high number of cases of gun violence even though the rules on gun use and license are stringent. Therefore, imposing more control will not end gun violence. With the strictest laws in the United States, New York city still registers a high number of cases of gun violence and this makes it hard to be able to generalize the impact of strict gun laws. Armed self-defense is the solution to this the problem occasioned by strict rules on gun licensing. If people who qualify and have valid justifications are allowed to own guns, the people will become more confident about their security and there will be no much efforts directed toward illegal firearms (Cudworth, 2019). The existence of black markets are guns sold and that is a good indication on what lack of a proper system which ensures that deserving citizens who satisfy all requirements are licensed. The policy should be reviewed to make sure that it is impossible for anyone to acquire firearms through black markets and pose as the legal owner. There should be thoroughly screening of persons who suspected to be part of the cartels who are in the business of illegal guns trade. This will eliminate the need to do away with gun ownership provisions of the constitution.

Guns also do not kill on their own. There are millions of people who own self-defense arms and have never been implicated on any incidence. Therefore, this means that gun violence is caused by a few elements of legally licensed citizens who are gun owners as well as criminals who use crude mechanisms to get themselves firearms (Cudworth, 2019). The problem that lies in the center of gun violence is not that many people have guns but that a few people who cheated the process or who have ill intentions have been able to use crude mechanisms to secure the ownership of guns and go ahead to execute their evil plans. Once such cases are reported or the police complete their investigations and determine that the gun was illegally owned and later used in ill motives or that the gun was in the hands of criminals, the concerned authorities should be probed to ensure that everything is accounted for and those who are convicted face their jail sentences.

Armed self-defense has economic consequences. When private citizens are armed, they can protect themselves and their families in case of attack by criminals. This will ensure that criminals don’t kill innocent lives who work hard to make the economy thrive (Felson & Eckert, 2018). The sale of guns and their manufacture also earns the country income through licenses fees and taxes. However, violence caused by increased use of guns may cause deaths and also hurt the economy. There have been many political severe arguments about gun control in the USA.

Those who argue for stricter gun control say that there are countries like the UK which have stronger regulations against gun control and therefore have less average murder rates and gun violence (Felson & Eckert, 2018). They also argue that the USA lacks laws that regulate firearms ownership across the entire country leaving that to states. The variation in-laws on the same across states are seen to be a problem. According to Cudworth, 2019, those who argue against stricter rules argue that there are over 20,000 laws in control of firearms in the USA and gun violence is still rampant and therefore the problem in is not on the side of availability of laws

According to Kamal & Burton, 2018, the current political scenario, passing a gun law in parliament is supported by Democrats while Republicans and the Trump administration are against it. The numbers of representatives on either opposition or government determine whether gun laws pass rather than the motive behind the control. American culture about owning guns is built in the tradition. According to Dhanapala et al., 2019, self-defense firearms have been in the hands of civilians licensed by the government agencies for many years and people are reluctant to change from the tradition. Religious organizations have also taken on the firearm issue and violence. According to Merino, 2018, religious factions have influenced the politics of gun control over the decades. For instance, due to the shooting in Southern Baptist church in Texas, many prominent pastors have taken on the issue and reached out to president Trump The denomination has 15 million members and this shows the weight of its decisions. There is a need for the government to be considerate about this issue because police cannot be everywhere at a given time and criminals take advantage of that fact to terrorize citizens and business owners. Arguments against self-defense on this issue claim that police can take care of security issues because the USA has a civilized society. This is not true because even with a civilized society many engage in uncivilized behavior. It is therefore crucial for the Trump administration to ensure that any changes that are made in the gun laws or about self-defense still maintain the need for Americans to own guns. This means that the right to own guns cannot be revoked as per the constitution.

In conclusion, this paper has analyzed the issue of self-defense in America coming up with justification on why it will lead to the reduction of gun violence. On the contrary, gun control rules have been unable to end the issue of gun violence due to loopholes in the system including the licensing process and the borders which are used by criminals to sneak in illegal firearms. Therefore, making sure that citizens who qualify can get training and licenses to own firearms is a solution to ensuring that citizens are safe because police cannot be everywhere at any given time.

Works citied:

Cudworth, J. (2019). Government Challenges with Implementing Effective Gun

Control Policies (Doctoral dissertation, California State University, Northridge).

Dhanapala, J., Donowaki, M., & Lumpe, L. (2019). Small arms control: Old

weapons, new issues. Routledge.

Felson, M., & Eckert, M. A. (2018). Crime and Everyday Life: A Brief

Introduction. SAGE Publications.

Goodman, S., & Perry, B. (2018). The American Gun Control Debate: A

Discursive Analysis. In Discourse, Peace, and Conflict (pp. 67-82). Springer, Cham.

Kamal, R. D., & Burton, C. (2018). Policy Gridlock versus Policy Shift in Gun

Politics: A Comparative Veto Player Analysis of Gun Control Policies in the United States and Canada. World Affairs, 181(4), 317-347.

Merino, S. (2018). God and guns: examining religious influences on gun control

attitudes in the United States. Religions, 9(6), 189.