Impact of poor gun control in US

User Generated

gehpi

Writing

Description

Research paper about Impact of poor gun control in US.

Answer question on each journal file attached to write a journal entry.

Are You On The Right Track?

Title:

Thesis:

Introduction (what’s the purpose of your research and why do you think your question matters)?:

What have you learned?:

What have you discovered that your sources haven’t thought about or asked?:

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Truc Vo Professor Zach Powers ENG 112 12/04/2017 Impacts of Poor Gun Control in the United States The regulation on gun ownership and usage has been debated by many scholars over the years and it is arguable that the rules provided by the U.S. government for the management of firearms have not helped in reducing the fatalities. There are approximately 7.7 million American citizens who are believed to own between eight and 140 guns, as evidenced by the recent shooting that happened in Las Vegas, killing 58 people and leaving 527 others wounded (Eric Fleegler 13). Most of the people who own guns claim that owning the firearms is an essential right granted to them by the state. America has experienced a violence epidemic in the recent times, and most of these deaths are as a result of a mass shooting. It is estimated that over 30,000 people lose their lives through guns every year in the U.S. This study focusses on five major issues that support the impacts of poor gun control in the United States. Mythical History of Firearms in the U.S According to the American history on firearms management, many citizens are enshrined with the right to own firearms, as a form of protection against private militia; as an acknowledgment of individual divine rights, as provided for in the Second Amendment of the constitution (Wintermute 16). Being a developed country, the U.S. experiences a unique gunrelated violence issue and is leading to such crime, owing to the constitutional right for the Americans to possess firearms. The government increases focus on gun control, every time mass shootings happen in the country, mainly in the poor and racially discriminated neighborhoods. With too many guns among the Americans, the core gun advocates argue that any new regulation to control the ownership of guns would not guarantee safety to the public, thus more arms end up in the hands of criminals. A study by Wintemute confirms that injuries and deaths related to firearms were culturally not seen as a problem until the twentieth century (Wintemute 16). The trends in the gun-related violence, including suicide and homicide by gun owners have been a perennial problem over the centuries. His argument that the trends remain almost similar is good evidence that the government is struggling to get the appropriate regulations to control the misuse of firearms. Political Interventions on Gun Control Gun control is a complicated subject which requires a powerful gun lobby and political intervention to settle the rift between the gun rights activists and the gun control programs. These two groups engage in major disagreements in court cases and the interpretation of law about the effects of firearms control in the relation to crime and public safety (Eric Fleegler 15). The nonrestriction of gun ownership rights inhibits the state from fulfilling its mandate in providing protection to the citizens. Gun rights advocates promote the use of firearms for sporting activities, hunting self-defense and security against tyranny. On the other hand, the gun control groups advocate for keeping guns away from criminals' hands, to promote safety in communities. The effect of these two opposing positions led to the Supreme Court judgment of 2010, which upheld individual's rights to possess guns, mainly for self-defense. In January 2013, a group of Americans participated in the Washington March for Gun Control, with demands for stricter legislation on firearms. However, in September 2013, surveys by Gallup and Huffington Post showed that the support for stricter gun laws reduced, following the Washington Navy Yard Shooting. In another poll conducted in 2016, a majority of the Americans believe that universal background checks should be applied before administering ownership of guns. Ratings have also been introduced, to rank states based on the strengths of their gun laws. The rights-based debates involve the most significant argument about how much authority the government holds in regulating the ownership and use of firearms (Eric Fleegler 15). First, the view that ownership of a gun is a fundamental right, as affirmed by the Supreme Court in 2008, requires the states to act reasonably in regulating the possession of firearms to protect human life. After the killing event in Newton in 2012 where 20 children lost lives, there were calls for the President Obama’s administration to restrict the ownership of military weapons (Eric Fleegler 15). However, the debate on the legislation to ban assault weapons and expansion of the background checks was defeated in the Senate in 2013. The action by public activists demonstrates that the government has failed in fulfilling its mandate in protecting the citizens from the incidences related to gun violence. Gun Control and Economics The Second Amendment of the U.S Constitution states: “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.” Following this regulation, the United States has about 30-50 percent of the civilianowned guns in the world, thus ranking as top in firearms per capita (Jarone Lee 18). The Federal law has set the minimum regulatory standards on firearms in the United States; however, the respective states have individual laws and policies, some of which are more lenient. For instance, states like Kansas, Idaho, and Alaska have instituted laws that circumvent the policies provided by the Federal Law. The Congress failed to pass reasonable gun control reforms, thus in January 2016, President Obama issued a directive on the executive actions package, which was aimed at reducing gun violence significantly. This directive saw firearm dealers obtain licenses from the federal government while enforcing background checks on all gun purchases. Other states like Canada have set gun regulations based on historical violence incidences. According to Jarone Lee et al, the costs of managing fatalities caused by firearms poses a major economic challenge to the U.S healthcare system. Lee proposed the need to develop intervention policies, which would help reduce the costs of gun violence. This approach is already overtaken by the current legislation and therefore it cannot bring much change in the government’s ability to control gun violence (Jarone Lee 19). Mental and Health-Related Effects Weinberger and others discuss the response to firearm injury, deaths, and public health consequences and proposed the elimination of physician "gag laws", through research and support strategies, with the aim of reducing the firearm-related injuries. They advocate for the use of physicians to advise the public on the risks of arms ownership and discourage the need for firearm safety (Weinberger Steven 9). This also includes the therapeutic sessions with those who have mental illnesses or are suffering from substance abuse. This approach also requires the federal government to keep off such sessions. With the increased rate of firearms acquisition and substance abuse, then this approach cannot work in controlling the use. The proposal to have blanket regulation compelling health professionals to report patients who demonstrate signs of mental illnesses, that may influence the wrongful use of the firearms came up in the discussion by Weinberger and his team members. However, this would result in stigmatization of such people, while it is the mandate of the physician to keep the information on patients confidential. Many of such mental disorders may not heal completely; therefore the risk still exists within the society (Weinberger Steven 11). The recommendation to suspend the right to possess firearms on the basis of mental disorders causes infringement on the rights of such people. The Federal law provides for an equitable, fair and reasonable process that is meant to balance the individuals' rights to public safety. Multiple Firearm Regulations According to Eric Fleegler et al, “A higher number of firearm laws in a state are associated with a lower rate of firearm fatalities in the state, overall and for suicides and homicides individually” (Eric Fleegler 15). This team placed emphasis on the counting the number of laws and relating this to the fatalities caused by firearms, either by accident or by intention. More studies have been done to find out whether the number of firearm laws in a state ultimately safeguards the citizens (Eric Fleegler 15). However, this debate has been controversial as there has not been clear correlation identified between the number of firearm regulations and the extent of fatalities resulting to firearms usage. Looking at the history of the firearms regulation within the United States of America, there has been multiple modifications and changes to the laws, while many court cases have happened in relation to the use of firearms (Eric Fleegler 15). In the same line, it is still arguable that the institution of many laws to regulate firearms does not have much impact on the control of the use of guns. Such regulations have been circumvented by many states, who institute their own laws for their citizens. The Constitution of the United States of America is more superior to any other laws laid down. Therefore, the argument to have many laws on this subject may not offer the expected results of controlling the possession and use of firearms. In conclusion, the government of the United States allowed for gun possession through the constitution and the people took advantage of the right provided, that is why America is still facing a major challenge in controlling the access to firearms, with the aim of minimising the negative impacts on the society. Many regulations brought up have helped the situation and therefore the government needs to think of a more viable approach to solve the menace (Eric Fleegler 17). Being an economic leader in the globe, security is a major consideration that must be addressed comprehensively. Works Cited MPH, Eric W. Fleegler MD. “Firearm Legislation and Firearm-Related Fatalities in the States.” JAMA Internal Medicine, American Medical Association, 13 May United 2013, jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/1661390?hc_location=ufi. “The Epidemiology of Firearm Violence in the Twenty-First Century United States.” The Epidemiology of Firearm Violence in the Twenty-First Century United States | Review of Public Health, www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev- Annual publhealth- 031914-122535. “The economic cost of firearm-Related injuries in the United States from 2006 to 2010.” Surgery, Mosby, 22 Feb. 2014, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0039606014000609. Weinberger, Steven E., et al. “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, American College of Physicians, 7 Apr. 2015, annals.org/aim/fullarticle/2151828/firearm-related-injury-death-united-statescall-action-from-8.
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Attached.

Surname 1
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
Impact of Poor Gun Control in the United States
Thesis statement: Arguments on whether gun ownership should be abolished because of the
impact that poor gun control has had in the United States.
Introduction
The United States is amongst the countries that allow its citizens to own guns as a way of
protecting themselves from insecurity. However, America is also among the countries that have a
high number of gun-related violence. This is because of lack of good gun control by the
government of the United States. The main purpose of the research is to identify the impact that
poor gun control has had on the people of the United States. This is because citizens of America
have indeed been affected by poor gun control by the government. This question really matters
because it enables people in America to understand how poor gun control is affecting the country
especially through the rising cases of gun violence which is a result of poor gun control.
Things learned from the sources or articles on gun control
The articles that focus on gun control have helped me understand a lot of things in
regards to my topic on the impact of poor gun control on America. The article written by Eric
Fleegler has helped me learn about the negative impact that ownership of a gun has had in the
United States. Most people claim that owning a gun is important because it helps protect from

Surname 2
any insecurity (Fleegler, 733). However, the information provided by Eric Fleegler has helped
me understand that instead of protecting people, ownership of a gun has resulted in an increase in
the cases of gun violence. The article has helped me learn that over 30,000 people in America die
annually as a result of guns. This shows that owning guns results in a lot of unnecessary deaths.
This article by Eric Fleegler has also enabled me to understand that the government has
had difficulty in fulfilling its mandate of protecting the citizens of America because of people not
being restricted in owning guns. Also, the article has enabled to learn that gun controls programs
are against the law ...


Anonymous
Really useful study material!

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags