The need for the use of fire arms:
Today, the use of fire arms like guns is being advocated in argument that it helps to ward off criminals and juveniles on the crime scene. These high-risk individuals are a threat to social security and well being. However, guns in the wrong hands could turn turtle any peaceful community and only federal measures can reduce the availability and define the use of guns. The threat to our society from the unemployed youth, drug addicts and mentally challenged adults and children is the basic reason behind the need to procure and use guns in certain neighborhoods. Though there have been some policy changes that ushered in a prohibition on the ownership and use of non-police handguns, the ownerships and registrations were not declared entirely.
Understanding the pros of effective gun control:
There has to be a stringent check on the ownership of all firearms and the number of manufactured firearms. The assertion of constitutional barriers, significant and relevant social costs and more comprehensive policies are certain to enable the law enforcers to keep a tab on the ownership and illegitimate firearm ownership transfers, individual and bulk. This will help deep a check on individuals and institutions that operated against the interests of a peaceful existence. Instead of opposing federal control, it is essential that we help to empower federal policies that focus on keeping firearms out of the hands of high-risk persons. The contrary would only endanger the security of society at large.
The effective gun control measures are a boon to law-abiding citizens and reinforce the constitutional rights. Even there are many advocates of the thought that widespread gun ownership is the way to keep crime at bay, it is essential to understand that it is not the gun that is being questioned, it is the hand that pulls the trigger. The threat of potential tyranny, gangs or any individuals, is being addressed; however, dealing with the situation with guns accessible by children, deranged adults and disturbed individuals is not the solution. The solution lies with effectively upholding the law and helping the law makers to curb illegal procurement of arms.
The cons of gun control:
The crime and mortality statistics is popularly calculated and quoted whenever the cons of gun control are discussed. The number of fatalities that could have been prevented in the presence of a firearm has increased. The federal government regulations make it very difficult for the common man in crime driven neighborhoods to buy a gun, while the thug, under any garb, continues to procure arms illegally. While a segment of the law guarantees individuals the right to own guns, another amendment makes owning a handgun difficult and many people feel that their constitutional rights are being denied. It is also observed that if the law-abiding citizens have guns, they are better equipped to handle situations where they might find themselves fact to face with criminals, thus bringing the crime rate down.
The role of law enforcers:
The federal law establishes strict registration requirements for procuring a gun, in addition to a transfer tax on machine guns and short-barreled long guns. The mail-order sales and the interstate sales of firearms have been also addressed and prohibited. The government has banned the transfer of arms to minors and thus, limits access to assault weapons. There are penalties in place and stringent licensing requirements for manufacturers and dealers that are maintained to check on illegal transfers. It cannot be denied that if more people are allowed to own and carry guns, deaths and injuries from the weapons will also subsequently increase.
It is the responsibility of every citizen to determine for himself or herself whether or not the procurement of arms is good for society at large. It is natural to not agree entirely with the pros or the cons, but a constant update on statistics should be reviewed and analyzed.