First, more gun control restrictions would reduce gun deaths. Guns are the fourth most cause of all deaths; there were 46,4033 total gun deaths between 1999 and 2013: 270,237 suicides (58.2%); 174,773 homicides (37.7%); and 9,983 unintentional deaths (2.2%). More guns in use will lead to more violent crimes. In 2016, about 16,459 murders and violent crimes were committed in the United States. Of these, 11,961, or 73% were performed with firearms. If there are less guns to use, then there will be less deaths because of guns. Some Latin America cities have forbidden guns; soon after, the murder rates dropped over 50%.More gun control laws such as required safety features would decrease the number of accidental gun deaths. Many unintentional firearm deaths were caused by friends or family members; and 89% of unintentional shooting deaths of children occur at home. Most of these deaths occur when children are playing with a loaded gun when their parents aren’t with them.
All of these accidental children deaths could have been prevented by safety devices on guns and by child proof locks. If there were indicators showing when a bullet was ready to be fired, a big amount of these accidental gun deaths could have been obviated. Reducing guns would strongly reduce deaths.Guns as Protection? Impossible!Second, most people with guns don’t use them to protect themselves, and the weapon ends up hurting someone instead. Studies have shown that places with more guns have more deaths. Over 500 bus drivers have been killed in robberies since 2007, most of these deaths were by the bullets of gun carrying passengers. People who use their guns to try to defend themselves are more likely to get injured or killed. The shooter will most likely aim for the armed civilians, and they will be in more danger. Citizens equipped with guns are more likely to make the situation more dangerous. The average gun owner, no matter how responsible, is not trained on how to handle these situations; so if a threat occurs, increasing the number of guns only creates a more life threatening position.
The presence of a gun only makes a conflict more violent. In the US, two-thirds of the 7,900 deaths in 1981 involving arguments were caused by a gun. The arguments and brawls turned violent when a gun was brought out “just in case”. Guns don’t protect, they kill and injure. The more guns there are, the more harm. More Regulations Lead to Less HarmLastly, less guns will lead to less homicides and suicides. If citizens all have easy access to guns, they are more likely to kill someone than if they don’t have access. Access to guns is the leading cause of homicides. A person who wants to commit suicide will most likely use a gun than another weapon. When gun ownership rates went down in the United States, suicide rates did as well, because when a gun is unavailable, people are unlikely to use another weapon. Countries with more restrictions on gun control have less suicides and homicides. For example, Switzerland requires gun owners to have a license and they do background checks. They had .31 gun deaths every 100,000 people while the United States had 4.19 deaths per 100,000 people.
Enforcing more gun control will diminish the amount of homicides and suicides. Justifying the TruthSome people think that there should be less gun control and less regulations on guns. As they understand it, people should have more guns at disposal to defend themselves in case of an emergency. This is wrong because more guns cause more deaths, and studies have shown that places with more guns are more dangerous. Most gun owners are not trained to use the weapon, so adding a gun just increases the chances of death. It could be said that the Second Amendment of the constitution protects the right to own guns. Although it might look like it, the Second Amendment is not unlimited, much less a right to keep and carry any weapon you choose for whatever purpose.
The Second Amendment is clearly applying to the “militia” with a view to use them in the common defence. For example, it’s illegal to lie to a police officer, right? But this isn’t a violation of the First Amendment, is it? So like many rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. Others might say that gun control won’t do anything, because guns don’t kill, people do. Yes, people are the ones that kill; but guns make it a whole lot easier, don’t they? This argument is used by people who can’t tell the difference between one or two deaths, and a dozen. Guns make it is much easier, and they kill many, not just a few. Despite the fact that there are other ways to kill someone, guns still are the most commonly used. Research shows that if a gun unavailable, it is unlikely for the murderer to use another weapon.
Therefore, if you take away guns, the murder rate will decrease a lot and it will be less likely for you to get killed. More gun control regulations are needed because guns kill, not protect, the Second Amendment is not unlimited, and because guns make it much more simple and straightforward. Time to ActThere should be more restrictions on gun control to reduce deaths, homicides, suicides, and harm. Think about it, if there are less guns, then there will be less deaths, right? So therefore more gun control is obviously needed because these deadly weapons are obliterating, and harming the human race. If you agree with me, help victims who were affected by these shootings and were harmed due to the lack of gun control by donating to different organizations such as Love MSD, which is helping Douglas High School funds.