This document discusses debates around gun control policies in the United States. It presents arguments from sources on both sides of the issue. Some argue that stricter gun control could reduce gun violence, while others say there is no evidence it would solve the underlying problems. The document also examines proposals such as restricting certain types of guns and requiring background checks for mental health. Overall, it analyzes the complex issues around balancing gun rights with public safety in the U.S.

1. Emily Muck
FYS 100
Gun Control
The underlying issues being debated in the articles are how much gun control is
enough and how much controlling is too much and how much is not enough.
From the article Controlling Gun Violence it mentions that gun control is the
wrong debate because there are thousands of people in the United States who
properly use guns every day (Bowman & Newton, 2013). Is gun control really the
way to solve the problem or is it taking the aspect of proper use into the main
view of the way to prevent this from happening.
According to supporters of stricter gun control, some possible advantages of
supporting the issue would be the reduction of gun violence in cities and would
limit the number of gun homicides in the United States. Statistics show that the
higher the security of guns in other countries has resulted in much less of a crime
rate and less attacks on masses of people (Ballaro & Finley, 2013).
According to those in opposition some possible disadvantages would be that there
is never a definite solution to the violence and even if there were to be stricter
limits on gun laws there is no statistic that can say there will be less fire arm
violence ( (Bowman & Newton, 2013).
Fallacies emerging from the debate are that one article, says there is a statistic that
shows less gun violence has resulted in other countries as a result of stricter gun
limits, yet another article says that there is no statistic. It makes it hard to believe
and the articles kind of contradict each other on certain points. Such as opinions

2. on the second amendment and how the components of it are taken into
perspective.
Alternative programs that have been suggested is the idea of making rules on the
type of guns a person can have in their possession. In the article Gun Control
Saves Lives it says that no one needs a AK-47 to kill a deer and that is completely
true a rifle would work just fine for that purpose ( (Ballaro & Finley, 2013). As
well as the idea stated in Gun Control: An Overview of limiting the types of guns
that enter into our country and by making people well educated on the use of guns
and how to properly hold a weapons permit as well as the NRA suggesting that
educators have a concealed weapon on them during school hours to keep their
students and coworkers protected. (Lee, 2013).
The implications that the debates have for families in society is the idea of
whether or not a family should invest in a gun for security or if it is worth it to
take a class on how to properly handle a gun. Aside from that, they must also
worry about the idea proposed by the NRA to have a weapon on every teacher to
protect students during school because this could affect their children or maybe
even themselves if they work in school systems or any institution which is willing
to consider this idea (Lee, 2013).

3. “The term “gun control” refers to any government policy limiting the ownership and use
of firearms. Gun control policies can restrict the types of weapons and accessories that private
individuals may legally possess or own (Utter, 2010).” Over the past year the United States has
suffered from many tragic gun shootings in schools, movie theaters, and large events. Due to
this, our country has begun to push the issue of whether or not we have enough laws for gun
control. Some may say that what we have is already enough; however, our country needs to step
back and reevaluate the current stance and add more restrictions to make sure our country is as
safe as it can possibly be.
After the mass shootings, it was announced that some sort of mental illness or instability
was a possible cause for all of the shooters’ reason of attack. Although this might not be the one
hundred percent cause, our country needs to understand that it very well could be. In 1968 The
Omnibus Act was passed to “keep firearms out of the hands of those not legally entitled to
possess them because of age, criminal background or incompetency (Edwards, 1993)." This may
make it seem like we have placed laws to keep guns from going into the hands of those who have
no business holding them, but it has been made quite clear that those with mental instabilities can
easily purchase a gun without undergoing a test of mental stability. We need to add a regulation
making it mandatory for every person who wants to purchase a gun or any weapon to undergo a
background mental stability test. This would be a protection to our country to ensure that we are
not allowing guns into the hands of those who can misuse them to kill innocent people simply
because they never had a background mental stability check.
Aside from the need of mental stability checks, the United States needs to also make a list
of types of guns that people can own. There needs to be restrictions because a person does not
need a gun equivalent to those of military use for everyday life. People need to treat guns

4. carefully because they are dangerous weapons that can be misused by people every day. It seems
alarms would go off in someone’s head if they noticed a suspicious person having possession of
a high power weapon that one would not use for recreational activities. While some would argue
that those who own guns are firmly against any gun restrictions, they have been proven
otherwise. According to the journal “One Gun a Month” in the Behavioral Sciences of the Law
Vol. 11, Neil B Kauder, states that 86% of people who own guns for security purposes and 76%
of people who own them for recreational purposes agree that there should be restrictions on the
number of guns a person is allowed to buy during a period of time and the types of guns that
people are to own (Kauder, 1993).” Therefore, there should be no excuse for someone to limit
the amount of guns a person can buy in a window of time or the type of gun in which they can
hold. Recreational guns such as handguns and rifles are not a problem; however, it is a safety
precaution that we do not allow a person to have possession of a military status gun.
Overall there is a need of more gun laws within our country. It could save innocent lives
from being taken too soon by testing the mental stability of someone when they purchase a gun.
It could help us grow together as a country to make our nation a safe place, while restricting the
laws of what types of guns a person has access to. Adding some restrictions to the current gun
policy would help us to grow stronger and to make sure that we can always offer a safe haven to
the people of our country.

5. Bibliography
Ballaro, B., & Finley, L. (2013). Points of View: Gun Control. 3.
Bowman, J., & Newton, H. (2013). Point: Controlling Gun Violence is More Important than
Controlling Guns. 2.
Edwards, A. A. (1993). Firearms and the Mentally Ill: A Legislative Overview and
Jurisprudential Analysis. Behavioral Sciences & The Law, 11(4) , 407-421.
Kauder, N. B. (1993). One-Gun-A-Month: Measuring Public Opinion Concerning a Gun Control
Initiative. Behavioral Sciences & The Law, 11(4) , 353-360.
Lee, M. (2013). Points Of View: Gun Control. Gun Control: An Overview. , 1.
Utter, G. (2010). Gun controL. In CuLture wars: An encycLopedia of issues, viewpoints, and
voices. Retrieved Febuary 11, 2013, from
http://ezproxy.marshall.edu:2048/login?url=http://ezproxy.marshall.edu:3589/content/entry/sharp
ecw/gun_control/0