Between 1999 and 2016, 572,537 people died due to gun violence (procon.org). The murder of George Floyd, The school shooting in Texas, The shooting at Tops grocery store. These are just a few examples of the mass shootings in the last two years. This year alone,” The US has surpassed 200 mass shootings just this year”(npr.org). “There are more mass shootings than days in the year”(Chris murphy youtube.com). Gun violence has been around since the invention of firearms. People have opposing opinions on whether all citizens should have access to weapons. For example, guns give a sense of safety but are hardly used for self-defense. The big question is ‘is there a foreseeable solution?’.

On the one hand, people believe that only trained law enforcers should be permitted to hold firearms. For example, "The Right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited… nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms" (ProCon.org). This shows that the second amendment allows the possession of firearms but never the misuse of the weapon. The law may save those using it in self-defense but not those using it to cause harm and destruction. Furthermore, the quote “The government can reduce shooting deaths by imposing common-sense restrictions on guns that do not violate the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Arming more people will not reduce gun violence” (Infobase.com) shows that implementing simple laws would quickly reduce gun violence at little expense or effort. 

A striking phrase was, ‘Arming more people will not reduce gun violence.’ This is because it portrays a powerful message. The message is that they should be spending more on the people than their military. In contrast, America spends more than China, India, Russia, Uk, Saudi Arabia, and Germany combined and still has 220 billion dollars left(world population review). Another reason that harsher gun laws would help is that they aren't used for self-defense. “Guns are rarely used in self-defense. Of the 290,618,300 crimes committed, 0.79% of victims protected themselves with a firearm" (procon.org). Based on this, restricting guns to the public would make streets safer.

However, on the other hand, some believe that possessing a firearm is an unrestricted right. An example of this is stricter laws would “Deny people a sense of safety” (procon.org). Considering that people cannot defend themselves against another armed person, a firearm may best fit the category of self-defense, and taking this option away from the general public could have vast repercussions. Another point is that “Education about guns and gun safety is needed to prevent accidental gun deaths”(ProCons.org). Education on a topic can make as much exposure as laws.

Furthermore, with proper education, guns can stay on the streets and increase self-defense numbers, making everyone safer. Moreover, “The vast majority of gun owners in the United States are law-abiding citizens who buy guns for sport or protection.”(infobase.com). Based on this, harsher gun laws would stop law-abiding citizens from defending themselves.  

My opinion on this topic is that we should implement harsher gun laws because it's about making the streets a safer place for everyone, and that means making people feel safe enough not to need to carry a firearm with them. Initially, the best idea to solve this would be to make guns less accessible to the public. For example, doing this might reduce gun violence, but it would also take away one of the best ways to defend yourself. It almost seems obvious that harsher gun laws are needed. However, we need to consider the safety aspect it might take away from the people.  You can compensate for this by improving police response times. This may work in theory. However, maybe not as well in practice. This is because of the prejudices that the police seem to show time and time again. It may be one day that they may act upon these prejudices, and adding more police officers may only increase the chances of this.

There may be pros and cons and opposing ideas, but doing nothing is not an option. Little kids in school should not have to go through the fear of thinking that they will be next. People of color should not have to be in constant anxiousness while doing something as simple as shopping for groceries. I may not know everything, but I know that we cannot just stand by and watch the tragedy unfold because we could not agree.  

In summary, Guns are running wild on the streets of America, and more people are dying every day. We do nothing about it. Some say that harsher gun laws would “deny a sense of safety”(procon.org), while others say “ arming more people with guns will not reduce gun violence”(Infobase). However, I say we come to an agreement that reduces killings and still makes everyone feel safe to walk out of their house. Finally, in the words of Senator Chris Murphy, “ why do you go through all the hassle of getting yourself the job of the senate. Of putting yourself in a position of authority. If you answer that as the slaughter increases, as our kids for their lives… we do nothing.”(youtube.com)

Works Cited

Britannica School Encyclopedia. "Gun Controls." Britannica School Edition, 18 Oct. 2018, school.eb.co.uk/levels/intermediate/article/gun-control/311545.

Infobase. "Gun Control." Issues & Controversies, Infobase, 24 Mar. 2021, icof.infobase.com/articles/QXJ0aWNsZVRleHQ6MTY1MzQ=. Accessed 12 May 2022.

Procon.org. "Should More Gun Control Laws Be Enacted?" Britannica Pro Cons, Britannica, 8 July 2022, gun-control.procon.org/.

Procon.org "The Real Top 20 Causes of Death." Britannica School Edition, Britannica, 29 Aug. 2018, gun-control.procon.org/the-real-top-20-causes-of-death/.