Arms Control: Arguments For and Against

Introductory Statement

Gun control is a phrase that is used to refer to “the efforts that are being put in place to limit the possession, production, importation, shipment, sale, and use of guns by private citizens” (Kopel, Gallant and Eisen 5). The guns referred to in this case are usually for private use. This topic was selected for study because gun control is a highly contentious issue in the United States. The debate on whether to restrict gun access by civilians has gathered momentum due to increased cases of robbery, suicide, and homicide involving firearms.

This paper is addressed to the general population and intends to use verifiable facts to shade more light on the issue of private gun ownership, its advantages, and its disadvantages. Thus the reader will have a clear understanding of the debate regarding controlled access to guns and be able to take a position (United States Government accountability office 15).

Key Issues/Main Ideas

The paper will address the arguments for and against gun control. There has been a raging debate in America as to whether the access to guns by civilians should be restricted or not. Those who have been lobbying for the restriction have often cited safety concerns. This paper will mainly evaluate the following points fronted by both those in favor and against strict gun control:

Domestic violence

The access to guns by civilians has been linked to many injuries and deaths at the domestic level. Proponents of gun control assert that guns that should be used to protect family members from home invasion are being turned against other family members. Various cases of homicide have been linked to the availability of guns in our homes. Opponents of gun control believe that guns are meant to protect homeowners from rampant instances of crime. This paper will look at the specific reasons fronted by both sides.

Civil rights

Opponents of gun control believe that owning a gun is a civil right. Those pushing for gun control believe that guns that are well intended initially may be used for the wrong purposes or may end up in the wrong hands. This paper will evaluate the different theories and legislations that argue for and against the possession of a gun as a civil right.

Self-defense

Those against gun control argue that guns are better placed to assist victims of assault and robbery to defend themselves. To evaluate whether gun control should be implemented or not based on this factor the paper will make use of the national data on instances where guns have been used for self-defense. This will be compared to the data on the criminal uses of guns (Kopel, Gallant, and Eisen 6).

Civic duty

Some opponents of gun control believe “that private gun ownership can deter instances of tyranny and crime that are promoted by the state” (Kates and Mauser 655). They argue that since the police are under the control of the state then civilians will be defenseless if the state promotes tyranny. This paper will seek the views of proponents of gun control on this point.

Illegal procurement of guns

Opponents of gun control argue that the increase in the number of crime instances is mainly due to illegal gun ownership and thus gun control will leave civilians more vulnerable to attacks (Kates and Mauser 664).

Conclusion

This paper will report on the various findings on the contentious issue of gun control. All facts and statistics fronted by the proponents and opponents will be evaluated to conclude whether gun control is good for our society.

Works cited

Kates, Don, and Gary Mauser. “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?” Harvard Journal of Law and Policy (2008): 30: 650-685. Web.

Kopel, David, Paul Gallant, and Joanne Eisen. “The Gold Standard of Gun Control.” The journal of Law, Economics, and Policy (2007): 1-7. Web.

United States Government accountability office. Gun Control and terrorism: FBI could better Manage Firearm-Related Background Checks Involving Terrorist Watch list records. Washington: GAO, 2005. Web.