FREE ESSAY ON ANIT GUN CONTROL

ANIT GUN CONTROL

Should there be gun control? Do we the people 
need help from the government to set guidelines and
bans out to keep us safe? If we did, would the prices
we pay surmount the desired results. No, gun control
is not a constitutionally sound device nor does it
protect us. 
Gun control is not a new tool. In the past century it
was used repeatedly by great rulers/dictators. 
However, these rulers used it as a tool to manipulate
and de-power a nations people. Before Hitler took
over and began his quest of racial cleansing, he
banned guns from all citizens. Do you think that the
stories of 2/3 of euro-jews being led to death 
like sheep would have been the same if they were
armed? I do not. Mass gun control was also used by
Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao Tse Tung to de-arm
and put entire nations to sleep. 
However, this could never happen to the United
States. Our founding fathers foresaw this and
enplaned a precautionary amendment into our
constitution. Thomas Jefferson had one of the
most intelligent views on gun control, he said Laws
that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those
who are neither inclined nor 
determined to commit crimes...Such laws make things
worse for
the assaulted and better for the assailants. This is
why we 
have a second amendment that gives us the right to
bear arms.
But have steps to violate this right already
been put 
in motion? I think so. Waiting periods on buying
guns are
ridiculous. If someone who raped and beat you was
getting
out of jail, and that person promised to re-visit
you, would 
you not like to aquire a gun the night you found out
they had
been paroled? I would. Also, should large and
sophisticated assault weapons
be available? Absolutely, yes. Weapons of this
caliber are
close to never used for criminal acts. Also, could
Sharon
Tate have fought off the Manson Family with a small
5 shot
pistol? No, any means we need to protect ourselves
should
be available, encouraged and without a doubt legal. 
For example, Switzerland has introduced laws 
requiring every house hold to contain at least one
fully
automatic assault rifle. To everyone's surprise, the
murder rate 
of Switzerland in substantially lower than that of the
United States.
Should we adopt such a radical life style? No,
but would something less extreme be bad? 
Another myth on gun control is the false
study stating
that statistics show that a household gun will more
likely be 
used to kill a family member than defend your home. 
This test
is an embarrassment to modern statistical studies, it
is deceptiveand downright poorly executed. This
test only counted the number of family members
shot to that of burglars shot to death.
It conveniently neglected to count criminals
wounded by these
firearms, criminals scared of by the crack of the shot,
or even 
potentially targeted houses left alone due to the
acquisition 
of knowledge that the home contained a firearm. 
When it all boils down, gun control is just a
bad idea.
It doesn't even effect criminals who's access to guns
will never 
be infringed upon. How can we prevent potential law
breaking
people from getting guns with such a large black 
market for firearms and such a great availability in
Mexico
and other nations of the world. Even if you did take
away
all the guns of the world, people would hold up
banks with 
bombs, knives, bow's and arrows, baseball bats, or
even an
long stale piece of French Bread. The way to
prevent such
crimes is find jobs for those people, and give them
role in
society. Are such laws needed when more people
will die 
by drowning each year that death by a firearm? 
(4,100 
drowning lost lives to 900 gun related tragedies) 
Should 
we out law all liquids? Of course not, gun control is
wrong,
and should be promptly abolished. 
Anti-Gun Control Essay
By Gabriel Ullrich
Period #7
Bibliography
none