FREE ESSAY ON GUN CONTROL

GUN CONTROL

Do We Need Tougher Gun Control Laws?
What does the sound of amendment mean? In its entirety it reads, 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. Does this confer an unqualified right to bear
arms? Or is it a right conditioned by the clause preceding the statement of right? Does
the militia refer to the pe9ople generally, or does it specifically relate to the
organized (well regulated) military bodies of state and national guards and the armed
forces? 
Gun control is one of many major topics of debate on Capitol Hill these days, but does it
get the due attention that it needs? Gun related crimes are a major problem in the United
States today. May believe that gun control laws need to become stricter, others believe
that gun control does not work and may actually increase the incidence of robbery and
other gun related crimes.
Carl T. Bogus and Daniel D. Polsby believe in the opposite views on gun control. Carl T.
Bogus argues that even in small amounts, gun control will reduce the number of gun
related crimes. Mr. Bogus presents facts suggesting that, along with other demographic
factors held nearly the same, there is much less gun related crime in areas that have gun
control. Mr. Bogus uses evidence of a (1980-1986) study of Seattle, Washington, and
Vancouver, British Columbia to support his opinions and reasons for suggestions that gun
control works even on a national level. With Seattle and Vancouver only 140 miles apart
these two cities are remarkably alike despite being located on opposite sides of an
international border. These two cities being similar in size, median household income,
unemployment rate, and racial difference one would expect that the crime rate would also
fall close together. Well, not exactly during the seven years of the study, there were
two hundred and four homicides in Vancouver and three hundred and eighty-eight in
Seattle-an enormous difference for two cities with comparable populations. The murder
rate with knives and all other weapons excluding firearms- were virtually identical, but
the rate of murders involving guns was five times greater in Seattle. (Carl T. Bogus, The
Strong Case for Gun Control, Summer1992)
What Mr. Bogus tries to show with this study is that it is not the population or any
other physical factor that plays into the enormous use of handguns to case crime, but the
single law that Vancouver had that Seattle didn't. A gun control law. Vancouver requires
a permit for handgun purchases and issues them only to applicants who have a lawful
reason to own a handgun and who, after an intensive investigation into ones background
are found to have no criminal record and to be sane. The reason of self-defense is not a
valid reason either. Those people wanting handguns for recreational uses are strictly
regulated. 
Mr. Bogus does great work on showing how a little gun control could help stop the rising
problem of gun-related crimes in the U.S. Imagine what could be done with an even larger
gun-control law. While Mr. Bogus pushes for more and stricter gun control Daniel D.
Polsby a Professor of la contends that gun control does not work and adds that it may
even entice more criminals to commit more crimes. Mr. Polsby leans more towards gun
control being a false promise to the public. Mr. Polsby states that the class of people
we wish to deprive of guns, then is the very class with the most inelastic demand for
them -criminals- whereas the people most likely to comply with gun control laws don't
value guns in the first place. What Mr. Polsby states is true but contradicts his entire
editorial. What this statement says is exactly why we need gun control laws passed. The
high demand people are the ones that are causing the increasing rate of murders in the
United States today. The people that do not care particularly about guns could care less
about a gun law.
Mr. Polsby brings up the question Do guns drive up crime rates? Well, first thing you
have to ask yourself is which promise is true - do guns increase crime or does the fear
of crime cause people to obtain guns? Mr. Polsby does a great job of answering these
questions in his side of the argument. He uses an article published by Arthur Kellermann
and several associates to present his beliefs. In Mr. Killermann's article he studied
fifteen behavioral and fifteen environmental variables that applied to three-hundred and
eighty eight member set of homicide victims, then found a matching control group of
three-hundred and eighty eight non-homicide victims, and then ascertained how the two
groups differed in gun ownership. The results were different, but the evidence, in my
view, could not persuade someone to say that there is no need for a gun control policy. 
Gun violence is a plague of such major proportions that only wars and epidemics rival its
destructive power. While reading opinions and facts from both sides of a major topic, it
brought great thought of myself into this topic. Gun control is something America needs
greatly. There are, by far, more positive points in having gun control than negative
ones. Mr. Polsby's thoughts and opinions on why there should not be gun control are
almost completely ridiculous. America as a majority wants gun control but not enough to
make it a priority in the voting booth. America needs more proof that gun control will
work. Once America learns that real gun control works is when America will learn of the
murder rate falling.