English help

People should not wait for incidence to happen so that they start thinking of what to do as they debate because nobody knows who will be the next victim, it could be you. Individuals should rise and put pressure on the leaders to do something to enact laws that will regulate gun ownership. What we often seen is the president speaking out on new wake of massacre and politicians will be passing condolences to the bereaved families and not expressing outrage and talking about gun control. Sometimes those who express stronger views on gun control sometimes are thrown out of offices like Police Chief Mark Kessler (Andrew, David, Brannon 44).

Advocates of gun owners claim that guns don’t kill people. But despite lobbying for gun control and huge support by a section of Americans for the control the congress will do nothing about it. Americans often respond swiftly and emotionally to incidence of gun crimes then forget it very fast and move on with life until the next streamed from the screens forgetting the fact that they could be the next victims.According to New York mayor Bloomberg gun facilities are expected to exceed traffic fatalities by 2015. The death as a result of shooting are at an alarming rate Washington has 106 homicides with firearms there in 2012 while 1,304 took place in California. According to the survey conducted by slate and the twitter feed, as of today, an estimated 28,676 people have died from the gun in us since the Newton shooting at elementary school. The only thing protecting people from bad guy with a gun is not a good guy with a gun since they were also once good guys but the only problem was to be with a gun.

Some Americans do accept that gun violence has become part of American life and there is nothing that can be done to impose stronger regulations. There is also inability by the congress to pass regulations on gun control. Politicians should walk the talk and enact regulations to control the guns. Gun control cannot be 100 percent solution to the problem but the murderers have to be understood and their motive behind the shooting. Once that is known people with similar traits and motives can be prevented from holding guns. Some cities that have banned gun shops still witness gun related murders. And therefore gun control cannot be the sole solution but researching deeper to know motives and characters with the same motives can be prevented from possessing guns. The incidents of gun violence are different and addressing form one point of view is actually missing the wider picture. Some legally own the guns but have motives of having individuals and such people should be disposed of their guns (Andrew, David, Brannon 45).

Factors leading to gun violence should be addressed such as poverty, mental illness and failing schools. It is time not to discuss gun control but the guts to mental illness, health and its impact on services. Public debates and attacks on the National Rifle Association have proven ineffective way to tackle gun violence. Guys spraying the cities majority of them are not members of NRA and therefore constantly attacking them is not the right path to go (Andrew, David, Brannon 45). People should not be allowed in to public places with guns. The restaurants owners should for example not allow people in to the restaurants with guns. They should have security personnel at the entry point to search and disposes any individual entering inside of their guns and can collect them when exiting. People entering movie theatres with guns should be a thing of the past and security officers should search every individual before entering (Ferrall 162). By security officers searching and ensuring no one enters cinema halls with a gun then the individuals will not be bringing them from home. Schools territories should also be out of bounce for any person possessing a fun. Mental illness should be better address by giving the victims enough care and counseling until they are free from such illness. In public places therefore it is only the police who should be allowed to hold guns (Ferrall 162).

Poverty should also be addressed. A very poor man will be frustrated and feel that he/she has nothing to lose in life if he/she commits such atrocities. Frustration and deep sense of disrespect to oneself often trigger such massacres. One feels that the world is unfair to them and become jealous with those who have everything by their side (Smith and Ross 98).Ban on the possession of magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds should be introduced. Currently Tens of thousands of law enforcement officers across the country currently possess these common, standard-capacity magazines when they are off duty for self-defense, sport and other lawful purposes.   Laws have to be put in place that will force active police officers to surrender their privately-owned magazines – or face criminal liability.

The second amendment should be relooked at because since then many changes have occurred in our societies including individuals having access to a more sophisticated. Change in societies is inevitable and it should also be so with the laws (Ferrall 162). The law should not be so rigid. The second amendment said that "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." James Madison and the Founders of this nation would be enraged to see the Second Amendment being used to put guns in the hands of the Tucson shooter and so many others like him. The right to bear arms is granted only in the context of a well-regulated militia and thus the security of a free state. This imbalance clearly threatens "the security of a free state." The Second Amendment says access to these weapons must be strictly regulated. As a free and lawful people, we have the legal duty to end this unconstitutional madness. Make no mistake: this murder and mayhem has been made possible by the claim to a Constitutional right that is not there. The Bill of Rights is the law of the land, clearly stated. Guarantees of religion, speech, assembly, the press, freedom from torture and so much more are natural rights, inherent to the human condition (Smith and Ross 98). But the right to bear arms is granted only in the context of a well-regulated militia and thus the security of a free state. A National Guard, yes. Heavily-armed lunatics roaming the streets unregulated... never!

Works cited

Spitzer, Robert J. The politics of gun control. New York: CQ Press, 2008

Patricia Smith and Brooke Ross. THE GUN DEBATE. Junior Scholastic, Scholastic Inc, 2013

v. 115(14)

Bard R Ferrall. Gun control--United States. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology,

Northwestern University School of Law, 1999, v. 89(3)

McClurg, Andrew J, Kopel, David B, Denning, Brannon P. Gun control and gun rights: a reader

and guide. New York: New York University Press, 2002