A debate about whether there is need for gun control or not

The fact of the matter is that not only are gun control laws unconstitutional, they are totally worthless in that nobody who would commit a mass shooting or any type of gun related crime is going to obey them. Where does that leave us? President Trump is open to changes, but the NRA balks at restrictions and lashes out at the media and Democrats.

The law signed by Hitler that LaPierre mentions in his book basically does the opposite of what he says it did. Science, however, has helped us solve problems we have long thought we just had to live with, or thought were unsolvable manifestations of evil.

We saw this on immigration. To those of us in the public health community, the path forward is clear: Research efforts had slowly but steadily ground to a halt following the passage of the Dickey amendment.

Same with Senator Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania. So why should guns be treated any differently? We need to find interventions that will both stop the violence and protect the rights of law-abiding gun owners. Common Dreams is not your normal news site. He could go after Gates just to nail Manafort.

These indictments are not about what happened on the campaign. The debate over guns has been charged — emotionally, socially, and politically. The estimated effects are highly sensitive to seemingly minor changes in the model specification and control variables.

Where guns are readily accessible, they can more easily fall into the hands of children. Nobody knows for sure, Hemenway said. We used to be able to conduct such work. So why should guns be treated any differently? Once again, from Washington, moderator Robert Costa. Most gun owners ARE good people.

Background-check numbers show a similar trend. In the s, researchers at the CDC began a program to find out how to prevent gun violence. Federal data also show violent crimes committed with guns — including murders, aggravated assaults and robberies — have declined for three straight years.

In full disclosure, my own position is not only that there is indeed a significant gun-violence problem in the U. There is work the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention could and should be doing, she said, but has not since the late s. These models are subject to what control variables researchers use.

But that figure is fromaccording to a footnote.

Why The Arguments Against Gun Control Are Wrong

I showed the group a large poster on which the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, where I was then the director of the injury center, had plotted the frequency of school shootings involving multiple deaths. And in what other context do so many people passionately support this counterintuitive logic?

Where does the gun debate go from here?

The following is a summary of the reasoning of the two positions. Another is called Earth. From torobberies committed with guns declined 21 percent and aggravated assaults committed with guns declined There is no reason to think that additional laws restricting access to guns, and to the most dangerous kinds of guns, would not — and actually do not — similarly reduce the great number of homicides, suicides, accidental deaths, and injuries in the U.

Even the congressman for whom the Dickey amendment was named would come to acknowledge the importance of gun-related research late in his life.

Gun Rhetoric vs. Gun Facts

Submit Avid hunter talks guns and Hitler actually relaxed gun control. Columbine took place during the assault weapons ban of It is the same with gun violence: Gates was on the campaign plane with the president. Even so, the CDC homicide data is not a perfect measurement of murders in the U.

You have to get out to vote.Regardless of whether Lott’s research stands up to scrutiny, I want to suggest that it’s mistaken to think about the gun ownership debate chiefly in terms of crime prevention.

On the contrary, whether there exists a right to own guns depends chiefly on whether guns are reasonable means of resisting crime. We should have stricter gun control. It is time for lawmakers to create and enforce stronger restrictions on guns.

There have been too many high profile shootings in. Since the gun debate is primarily about whether guns are reasonable means of resisting crimes, the fact that guns may not work to prevent crime doesn’t really damage the case for gun ownership.

This same is true even if guns increase crime. Oct 05,  · The two primary prongs of the “gun control doesn’t work” argument are that: 1) gun control does not reduce gun deaths largely because 2) it does not actually make it more difficult for.

Does their 'NEED', not 'want' stricter laws, and yes, I think it is a necessity that there are stricter laws. After all these recent shootings, it seems needed.

Any mentally handicapped person can just go and buy a gun, any violent criminal (gun or no gun crime. The second is that there is, in his mind, “not much support (to put it mildly)” for the move.

Only on gun issues can something with roughly 80 percent public support be described as a political nonstarter.

It’s true, though, that there’s not much support for the measure among Republican members of Congress.

A debate about whether there is need for gun control or not
Rated 4/5 based on 10 review