Why gun controls should be adopted

Though several laws have been passed, it is evident that these laws have not reduced mass shootings in different states. In the United States of America, there are various federal gun laws as individual states have the liberty to implement their gun laws. Arizona has the most lenient gun laws, and California has stringent gun laws. Currently, gun law controls within the United States of America include waiting periods, background checks and pre-registration requirements (Pederson et al. To prevent the increased cases of mass shootings, most states have prevented people from with a concealed carry permit to carry a handgun (Alcorn and Scott 233). Gun legislations are essential to ensure that stringent federal background checks are conducted to reduce firearm deaths. Gun control laws can also ensure that background checks for ammunition purchases are undertaken to reduce death rates considerably by more than 80 %( Michael and George 167).

In effect, the introduction of gun control laws could include different elements of gun identification and gun licenses to limit the number of firearm homicides. Granted, the need to continue upholding gun regulations are essential to ensure that high-capacity magazines are eliminated from their local system. Most of the high-caliber weapons have been used in mass shootings. As a matter of fact, only 1% of the victims who acquire guns protect themselves with a firearm Jones, (Michael and George 167). Granted, most of the firearms purchased with the pretext of being used in self-defense have been used in criminal gun homicides, property crimes and drug-related criminal incidents. The primary reason is that most of the guns that are legally acquired are likely to be stolen and used by criminals (Kleck 495).

As a matter of fact, information from the Institute Of Medicine indicates that most of the guns used in crimes enter the system through the use of illegal transactions. Between 2005 and 2010, more than 1. Moreover, gun regulations do not reduced crime, as they believe that it is unlikely for criminals to attack houses where owners have firearms. Responses to Objections The constitution contains a provision for the right to bear arms. It is necessary for those who uphold the Second Amendment to understand that the constitution only allowed guns to be held by militias to guarantee national security (Alcorn and Scott 233). It is therefore preposterous for individuals living in a community that has a low crime rate to argue that they have a right to own several handguns since it is their constitutional right (Fox and Emma 15).