Strict gun control laws, how they do not stop gun violence in our country.

Regulating Firearm Ownership
Name
Institutional Affiliation
Introduction
The United States has been a hotbed of several debates concerning its society in general, but none has been as hotly debated as that of gun control. Every time the issue gets calmed down, mass shootings suddenly erupt, which in turn result in the issue raring its head once more. It becomes a matter of back and forth as far as gun control regulations go. The regulation of gun ownership has been a controversial topic in the United States for many decades. This essay examines the impact of gun-control on the prevalence of crime. Besides, it assesses whether stern gun control laws reduce or stop gun-related violence in the US.
The Current Conundrum
The whole debate has been a matter of back and forth with seemingly no side willing to throw in the towel. The supporters of gun control argue that increased circulation of guns leads to more gun-related violent crime. They also claim that owning a private firearm increases the chances of an individual getting killed either accidentally or intentionally. Also, advocates of gun control laws suggest that keeping the guns away from the culprits helps in the prevention of violent crimes and taking private firearms that are already in circulation may drastically reduce gun-related violence.
Critics, on the other hand, claim that firearms do not kill people, only individuals are responsible for the deaths of their fellow citizens. They claim that if more people were allowed to own guns there would be less violence because they would use the weapons to protect themselves. They also say that restricting private gun ownership goes against the Second Amendment which authorizes and gives people the right to own and keep firearms (Spitzer, 2017). In addition, they claim that preventing Americans from owning guns would not stop crimes because most violent crimes are not gun-related.
Gun Ownership and Violent Crime
The history of humankind is filled with millions of cases of violent crime causing death through all sorts of weapons such as arrows, poisonous chemicals, knives, spears, arrows and fireballs. The list of weapons used to commit such crimes are endless, some even unimaginable. Law enforcement records indicate that in most cases people that commit violent crimes are either mentally or emotionally disturbed (Friedman & Percival, 2017). There can be various causes of these mental or emotional imbalances. Alcohol and substance abuse, family dysfunction, videogames and movies the feature violent scenes, and a system of education that does not equip young adults with ethical principles on how to deal with challenges are some of the contributing factors of violent crimes.
Guns are a modern weapon for committing crimes. Most people have focused on banning private ownership of guns without considering the underlying reasons for criminal behavior. According to Ausman & Faria (2019), there is overwhelming evidence that revoking private ownership of firearms of Americans does not reduce gun-related violent crimes. They further assert that people who want to commit crimes will go ahead and acquire guns illegally to complete their plans. If a criminal has set his or her mind to execute a certain crime, whether there will be controls or not, they will do it. Besides, mass media and medical press are unwilling to publish articles with divergent opinions that meaningfully oppose the authorities and advocate for the rights of Americans. For instance, the right of individuals to own firearms as directed by the United States constitution.
By 2003, the United States had more than 300 million privately registered firearms. The rates of gun sale have since risen at a rate of 5 million guns per annum. With the number of guns registered guns increasing, the advocates of gun control laws argue that more firearms mean more violence. However, this is not consistent with the statistical information which indicates that disarming the public does not reduce the number of deaths related to gun violence while death (Monuteaux et al., 2015). Murderers have techniques of acquiring firearms even in countries where there is very low ownership of guns. They might as well use other weapons if guns are not available.
Comparative studies in thirty-five nations all over the world indicate that lesser firearm availability does not translate into lesser violent crimes. There is also consistency in the lack of correlation between ownership of guns and violent crimes in different states. The statistics of gun-related violence of the US is always compared to that of Western Europe and supporters gun control attributes this phenomenon to stricter gun controls in Europe. However, this is not true because cases of gun violence in Europe were much lower compared to the United States even before their governments came up with strict firearm control laws. This means even if the Federal government continues to regulate private ownership of guns in the United States because crime rates depend on the socio-cultural fabric of society.
The argument provided by the supporters of gun control that more guns lead to gun violence is only plausible if individuals think that in most instances crimes committed by ordinary American citizens as long as guns are available. This may not valid because studies indicate that most murderers, terrorists, robbers and other violent criminals have been involved in other minor offences prior to their crimes. Unlike ordinary people, such individuals may be extremely antisocial with history of substance abuse, violence, rape, crime and psychopathology. About 15% of the United States citizen have criminal records compared to 90% of adult murderers. Also, there is a 90% chance that people that use guns in the wrong way have criminal records (Monuteaux et al., 2019). This means that allowing people to own guns may not increase the rates of crimes because ordinary citizens are not involved in murders or violence with or...