Gun Control to Help Keep People Safe or Just That Control Them?
When the topic of gun control is entered into any sort of conversation there the two main
viewpoints is that there are those who view it as a necessary usually for the reason of, they really
do not know much about firearms or they are personally do not like them and see them as a
dangerous thing that no one needs to own. Then you have the other side that enjoy firearms
either as a sport like competitive shooting or hunting to just going a range to have fun. Then you
have people who view firearms as a means of protection from either wildlife or other human
from trying to harm them or their loved ones. Some of the main forms of gun control that is
debated in this county is restrictions on magazine capacity, assault weapon bans, and where
people should be allowed to carry a firearm. Most gun control debates could be summed up by
this “Proponents of increased gun control in the United States argue that limiting access to guns
will save lives and reduce crime; opponents insist that it would actually do the opposite by
preventing law-abiding citizens from defending themselves against armed criminals.” (Duignan,
B. 2022).
When magazine capacity restrictions are introduced over the years it has usually resulted
in any magazine with more than ten rounds is no longer allowed to be used. For people that
either not really educated about firearms or do not like them usually vote for this restriction. The
main reason they do is people who do not like firearms view them a necessary policy to help
keep everyone safe, while those who just are not that knowledgeable will see it as not a big deal
to have reduction in magazines. But this kind of policy create a real and sever disadvantage and
can pose severe harm to people who rely on firearms for protection whether it is for self-defense
or the protection of property or loved ones. “In this free-for-all, the assailant had, in fact, been
struck 14 times. Any one of six of these wounds – in the heart, right lung, left lung, liver,
diaphragm, and right kidney – could have produced fatal consequences, “in time,” Gramins
emphasizes.” (Remsburg, C, 2020). This could have easily been a civilian put in the same
situation protecting their life, property, or loved ones. This situation was just one person it would
have been much worse if there were multiple people trying to attack. But this is fitting example
of why magazine capacity restrictions are very harmful policy and does nothing but put those
who obey the law at a greater risk of being harmed.
As for assault weapon bans these policies are all about getting rid of poplar rifles that are
in common use for protection and or sport. The main reason the people want these bans is
usually because those who do not like firearms try to get these types of polices after they are
used in criminal activity by using people emotions after a tragedy to get people onboard with
these types of policy all in the name of safety. Which is very misleading due to focusing the
blame for a tragedy on a tool that was used instead of looking at the real root cause of why the
tragedy happened and what could have been done to prevent it. Those you are not that educated
about firearms believe that these bans are necessary and get sucked in by the emotions after
something happens. While those you who enjoy and use firearms for lawful propose see no
reason for these bans as they do nothing but take away useful tools for law-biting citizens to use
to protect life, property, and liberty. These bans do nothing but act as a brandade whenever some
sort of tragedy happens, instead of seeing if the person or group that committed the wrongful act
were mental stable or were drive by extreme emotion. Another to look at would be the location
most of these tragedies happen at places where law-biting citizens cannot have a firearm on their
person. If more people looked at these facts instead of just looking at the surface of what
happened and thinking through emotions, they would see how these bans do nothing but harm
those who ensure they follow the law. “As a result of [D.C. v. Heller], if you're going to pass an
assault weapons ban which is in direct contrast to what the Second Amendment says, what our
Supreme Court has said, I’m not going to comply with unconstitutional laws,” Noir told host
Tucker Carlson (Creitz, C, 2021)
Lastly a big part of most gun control in the country right now is restricting places and
areas where people can carry their legally owned firearms by calling then gun free zones. Most
of these areas include federal buildings such as post offices, court building as some examples.
Other areas are schools, big events such as concerts pretty much most places that involve a
constant large amount of people are usually areas where people are not allowed to have their
legally owned firearms with them. The people who want and continue to push for more places to
be on the list of not allowing firearms believe that putting up signs and declaring that places are
gun free zones will help make everyone safer. All these policies due is harm and put law-biting
citizens at a disadvantage. Those that want these policies are trying to add more places to the list
of places one of those being religious buildings. To prove that these polices do more harm than
good 2019 in Texas there was a situation where a church had people open fire during a service
and one of the members of the church had their legally owned firearm and was able to stop the
armed intruders. This is just one example proving that law-biting citizens if allowed to have their
firearms will help protect life, property, and liberty of not only themselves but others as well.
Another area would be shopping complex or malls. Yet again just a last month there was an
armed intruder in a mall food court and an armed citizen was able to stop the shooter will before
law enforcement arrived. This just prove how theses gun free zone polices do not help make
people safer.
Gun control is this country is one of the biggest debate topics in almost everyone area.
The three most talked in recent years are limiting the number on rounds magazines can hold,
Gun Control in the U.S.
https://www.britannica.com/story/gun-control-in-the-us
Why one cop carries 145 rounds of ammo on the job
https://www.police1.com/officer-shootings/articles/why-one-cop-carries-145-rounds-of-ammo-
on-the-job-clGBbLYpnqqHxwMq/
Colion Noir tells 'Tucker Carlson Today' 'I will not comply' with Dems' gun ban, cites landmark
Heller verdict
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/colion-noir-i-will-not-comply-with-biden-gun-ban
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
