Too easy to get a gun in the U.S Essay Example for Free

Too easy to get a blast in the U.S stressLike vehicle owners in the U.S.A or so good deal in the U.S moot that gun owners should be subjected to at least some safety regulations there should be a parallel set of regulations for guns, (Harvy Lipman, 1997 pg 1). People take up differing value attachment to guns from the positive to the negative unmatcheds. However about three quarters of the Ameri loafer mass believe that imposing a total ban on gun ownership is not the way. It is estimated that roughly half of American populace think that if they own a gun then they are often safer within their homes. The biggest issue for America, be traces not how to ensure a total ban but then how to be sick some minimum regulations for every American citizen to own a gun and thereby control their bod.. bulk of some Americans believe that the contemporary laws are so different from one state to another the pith is that the citizens want reasonable gun laws that are not so strict a nd as some(prenominal)(prenominal) can reasonably be reinforced. One of the possible reasons that pass been proposed includesAttending a gun course nearly people within the united states of America believe that if anyone who wants to own a gun was to be subjected to a mandatory gun clinic on how to operate and handle the weapon without endangering themselves or the rest of the society, then the number of people wanting to own a gun would find it cumbersome to attend such clinics. In fact the national Brady law that requires citizens who wish to buy and own guns to wait for at least volt days before that gun is sold to them is supported by nearly 90 percent of Americans (Harvin L, 1997). This they believe would ensure that these individuals who intend to buy the guns have their backgrounds assessed by law enforcers so that when they are issued with the guns they are attached a clean bill of health. This according to them would limit the number of guns ending up in the unlawfu l hands. In imprint criminals would not find it easy to access guns and as such many problems such as robbery, deaths would be minimized. It also has the effect of limiting the number of people possessing firearms.Barring Felons and drug users the scheme under this perspective is that, if access to guns for criminals is denied then the number of crimes that would have been arrangeted by these fellows would certainly come down (Kurt F. 1981,pg6, Col. 4).Having uniform gun law across the states the current gun control law varies from one state to another and some of them are just merely about registration of the original leverage and to the extent of licensing. However with the persistent gun issues, there needs to be an enactment to ensure that the interstate gun flow is controlled. For instance, a state such as New York that has enacted various laws that is repressing to gun control faces the problem inflow of numerous guns from other states, with less restriction. The numbers o f guns that are illegally owned by most Americans even complicates the situation further.These weapons are increasingly being stolen and as such restrictive laws are not enacted and with a major cooperation from gun owners and the rest of the public then not much progress will be done. Guns unlike other consumer products are quite durable. However, the federal law precisely requires the initial retail sale to be documented. Subsequently, the after sales are not usually monitored, as there is no documentation required by law. This scrams it easier for people to sell their guns and criminals and other dangerous people easily obtaining guns. The initial gun owners unwittingly sell guns or giving them away to second parties.The federal government should also put a limit on the number of guns an individual is allowed to own. In effect this would bring down the number of guns that are owned by the public, as it would require those who have much than the maximum number required by the law to surrender the excess. Right now it is possible for a citizen to own as many as ten firearms.Empirical evidence suggests that most oft the countries that have successful gun regulations have very strict laws that punish offenders. It is argued that criminals usually find it hard to commit a crime if it poses a greater risk to them. Criminals would be hesitant to use guns if it would make the manakin of crime they are intent on committing more severe. Thus if strict laws are passed to punish offenders most criminals would not engaged in the activities using guns.Gun owners should have their firearms registered with the federal government. This would make them more responsible to the use of the weapons. Within their homes and the society as whole the adults who posses the guns would make it their business to keep track of their firearms so that no one else uses the weapons. This in effect would also isolate criminals as their moves and actions with the guns would be monitored. . Even the routine citizens would find it hard to purchase the weapons, since there is the possibility that the gun might end up in the wrong hands making them liable to prosecution.Even though it might be seen to be going away against the law and to some extent it might also prove to be costly in implementation, the guard should be allowed to finger print every person and record the obtained data in a file. This would make it easier to monitor most criminals.Works CitedHarvy Lipman Rights and regulations Americans want firearms and federal restrictions, poll finds. Albany Times Union, 1997Kurt F. Kluin, Gun retard Is it a Legal and Effective Means of Controlling Firearms in the United States. 1. N.Y. Times, Mar. 31, 198 1, A, at 6, col. 4.Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig, guns in America home(a) survey on private ownership and use of firearms, USA Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice