It seems today that on both of the gun control issue there are a vast number of statistics to back up both arguments. These statistics, however, are typically misrepresentations of the issue. Those that are in favor as well as against increased gun control can find and formulate statistics to back their points but these numbers can often be misleading as impressive lists of numbers to back any argument are quite easily attainable and can create virtually any impression. In summation this issue should not be looked at with opinion polls or the like but with the most predominant trait of the founding fathers while creating the constitution, common sense.
Those who would be using guns for violence and crime have an uncanny tendency to break the law anyway, and would be able to find the weapons no matter what the law is. To think that thugs who ignore laws against murder, robbery, and other high crimes will be thwarted by their inability to procure the proper paperwork is terribly false.
I do not wish to sound insensitive in my argument but stricter gun control laws can also be dangerous for the average citizen. Where would a criminal rather focus his/her confrontations? In a place where the average citizen is probably carrying a gun or an area where gun control is stricter and most often times the average citizen is defenseless? I think that the answers are quite obvious but further proof can be seen in the juxtaposition between Washington D.C. and Florida, two areas that are on opposite ends of the spectrum on the issue. Washington D.C. has much stricter gun control laws than Florida, yet the crime rate is much higher in the nation’s capital than it is in the Sunshine State.
There is a greater argument that virtually trumps all concise argument for gun control and its 27 word longevity is poignant, unambiguous and reads as follows, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Our country was founded on the idea of revolution and the right of the people to oppose the government when they feel that their rights are being infringed upon. Now as a content citizen of these United States I am not partial to revolt but I am a proponent of keeping the people’s ability to do so alive. The Second Amendment was explicitly written out by our founding fathers for a purpose and thusly decreed by our founding fathers to not be infringed upon.
The average gun owner does not have their weapon for any illegal purposes or idealistic reason, but for recreational target practice. Senior Ryan Ford said, “I don’t play football or anything like that, target shooting is my hobby” Ford further exemplifies the natural right for the citizens of the United States to have guns. On the already existing gun control laws Ford said “I had to go through extensive testing and regulation to get a gun,” and “anymore regulation would be ridiculous considering how much work I put in to get my gun.”
What people don’t realize is that we are moving towards a Hobbesian social contract where we citizens forfeit up our rights to a government in exchange for protection and regulation. The nation itself, however, was founded on the ideal that the government is meant to serve the people as a neutral judge to protect the lives, liberty and property of those that live within it. If American citizens begin to compromise on such a fundamental right, the nation will take the first step down a slippery slope toward an era of further government regulation, limited rights and dare I posit, sedition.