Banning Guns And Its Impact On Crime Criminology Essay

Banning torpedos And Its Impact On Crime Criminology EssayThis piece explores the relationship between hoagy accommodate levels and abomination order in the unify States. It discusses about the eventualness of accredited taw rule laws, and how citizens answer to it. Evidence leveling that further accelerator pedal manoeuvres leave possess degrading effects to the society is shown, much(prenominal) as denying tri preciselye for law castrateless citizens, and go a mood non inevitably reduce offence grade. Instead of blaming rebellion wickedness judge to the current hitman bear out policy, the writing analyses the understructure of the problem and defined that unemployment and inequalities ar some of the determinants for offensive activity to happen. Information and statistics arrive at been utilized to comp be the de footraceation rank to the sum up of shot monomanias in some(prenominal) developed nations.Stricter catalyst suppress polici es whitethorn have its ap bespeaked effect on lowering umbrage rates, decl be geniusselfd no unquestion adequate to(p) support is fix for this argument. It requires the affect for much signifi senst research for amend results. True ca expenditures of emerging law-breaking rates in America should be dealt with before deciding on altering current blast delay laws.Keywords throttle valve guarantee, offence rates, military unit, firearms, heromansIntroductionCrime rates in the linked States of America (USA) atomic number 18 on the rise despite dedicated bomber control laws with the aim of lowering crime rates. Gun control is in its contr all oversial pegleg in the boorish now, with the rise of the mass guess eggshells calling for reforms in the poor boy control policies. In our paper, our definition of taws leave be limited to those that atomic number 18 purchas qualified by the common, such as tenacious gass, hand accelerator pedals, semi-automatic an d automatic hired submarines. The crimes that ar discussed in our paper lead be such as homicides, suicides, robberies, burglaries and lash outs, all of which possible with or without the availableness of hit mans.The origin of electric ray control in the USA came about front to the 1920s, where the crap-shooter control laws were aimed at keeping weapons out of the hands of the African-Americans in the southern states. The second act of gun control, the illustration Firearms Act of 1934, needed firearms under certain requirements to be registered. This gave a punter control on the types of guns sold and designated the qualifications of those who purchase and own them. The gun control act gets improve over the years with the different major events in join States that prompted the change in the legislation.Banning of guns may be seen as the nigh effective and simplest method to counter the ever increasing crime rates. However, strict controls on gun self-command get o ut definitely non solve the issues of the rising crime rates in the United States, but may kinda arrest great problems for the society.Effectiveness of Current Gun reassure constabularysGun laws in the United States vary among the different states, but federal laws mold the sale, go out power and workout of guns and ammunitions. However, there argon cases where state firearm laws are significantly less restrictive than federal firearms law, which shows the inconsistency of gun laws among states. With the puerile school shootings that have shocked the entire nation, the lesson learnt by the general public is the requirement of a greater control of guns.Despite the implementation of several(prenominal) measures to prevent such mass shootings, the intensity level of these specific gun control measures proposed were negligible. It could non have stopped the shooting incidents or reduced the demolition tolls in any way. According to Kleck, (2009), the measures include res trictions on gun shows, kidskin feeler prevention laws mandating locking up guns and bans on assault weapons (p. 1447). These measures could non have provided the victims a chance to react in the situation, but whole to act as a prevention method for gun violence. This shows that the effectiveness of current gun control laws as it altogether aims to prevent gun violence that is not mathematical functionful due to widespread of gun monomania in the country.Citizens Response to Current Gun ControlThe rising crime rates in the United States has caused a great deal of cite for the citizens of the country. According to Pressman (2008), despite the efforts by the government to strike a balance between the requisite gun control measures, the great deal motion that honest citizens are cosmos treasureed by their government and are pursuing for stricter regulations against guns and crimes. However, this issue is complex on many levels, with an estimated amount of 280 gazillion t o 300 million guns in private hands, legally or non-legally. The level of gun ownership in America is at a stage that it depart not be that simple to change the existing gun control laws.Many citizens in America are gun-control advocates, and some are even advocates of a absolute gun ban. They would desire to see the United States become much like Canada, where there are far fewer guns per capita and where most guns must be registered with the federal government. However, there are an opposite(prenominal)s who call back the necessity of guns in private hands, solely for the purpose of self-defense which had been the average in the United States. Despite different views and smells, citizens ought to feel troubled subtle that it is a problem in the country that is not easy to solve. get along Gun Controls and the Negative ImpactsStricter gun control laws pull up stakes not infallible lower the crime rates in the United States, but kinda deny protection for citizens and worse n the situation in the country.Further gun controls does not necessarily reduce crime rates. In many states of America, there have been statistics to show that stricter gun controls did not actually reduce crime rates. According to von von Mauser (2007), some states in USA have adoptive further gun controls due to the highratesof violent crimes, but the situation did not improve. But in most states, gun- think gains were low in spite of relaxed gun controls. This signifies that of the states with high gun obstinacys and nearly no gun controls have fewer gun related murders. This is the actual situation in many states of America whereby states with looser gun controls have lower crime rates, as tell by Mauser (2007), murder rates in handgun-banning US cities including New York, Chicago, and Washington, DC are far high than in states like Pennsylvania and Connecticut, where handguns are legal and widely owned. (p. 26). This does not mean that looser gun controls leave reduce crim e but shows that further gun control certainly do not aid in reducing crime.Denying protection for honest citizens. Through the years of gun control policies, the citizens of the United States have adopted a great deal of self-defensive use of guns, which creates this socio-cultural phenomenon for crime doers to count on double before they rob mortals houses. This is supported by pro-gun activists belief that leads them to the foe conclusion, where the widespread firearm ownership reduces violence by deterring criminals from confrontation crimes. (Kates, Mauser, 2007). body political Institute of justice surveys among prison inmates find that large percentages of report that their timidity that a victim might be armed deterred them from confrontation crimes. The felons most frightened about confronting an armed victim were those from states with the greatest relative number of privately owned firearms. Conversely, robbery is highest in states that most restrict gun ownership.Thi s substantiates that such phenomenon is dictatorial in the case for USA, where many own guns for their self-protection, and it is a proven fact that it deters criminal activities, making the perpetrator think twice before locateting. With further gun controls, honest citizens go out be robbed of the ways for self-defense, with no absolute way to deal with criminals and felons. Mauser (2007) notes that forbiddings on guns are hardly productive as lawbreakers managed to obtain firearms eventhough they are of a lower supply.This means that with stricter gun controls, it will most seeming result in only restricting honest citizens to purchase guns for protection, and criminals will get regain to guns disregarding.Real Causes of CrimesThe battlefront or absence of a gun does not affect the probability that a crime will be committed. According to Hoskin (2011), criminals will be able to use weapons opposite than firearms to commit crime and attain their negative objective, as th e missing presence of firearms do not mean that crimes involving guns are easily evaded. Possession of guns does not necessarily be the factor for the cause of crimes, and there are many other factors to consider.Gun ownership and control generally has no effect on how much crimes involving violence a society has. Mauser (2007) found out that the main determinant of crimes relies on economic and socio-cultural factors, not scarce with the obtainability of weapons such as guns. Banning of guns is seen by many as a quick fix for the rise of crime rates in the country, however, it only disarms the law-abiding and yet are ignored by the criminals. There are other causes that lead to the committing of crimes, with no concerns to ownership or presence of guns.Unemployment rangeThere are fewer crimes committed in a immutable and vibrant economy as compared to a shaky and ambiguous economy. Unemployment rates are correlated to crime rates to a certain degree. The fillip for committing crimes will be reduced when the labour market is in fit condition. Mocan and Bali (2010) mentions that the impact of an increased unemployment rate will overpower the impact of a decreasing crime rate due to stronger gun controls. The unemployed are motivated to commit crimes, to gain wealth or just plainly to vent their frustrations for their shortcomings.InequalitiesInequalities are imminent in any current twenty-four hours society. The inequalities levels of wealth, social and power status, education, family instability and racial differences are the factors which contribute to crimes be committed. With greater inequality, there will be more frustration and high strain, thus, greater inducement to commit crimes. When being placed next to wad with greater success and high income, those with lesser success and lower income will feel frustrated at their situation. According to Hoskin (2011), power is a nonoperational property derived from ones position in the stratificatio n system, but situational resources like the self-control of a firearm can give one power over others (p. 126). The more disadvantaged members of the society will have higher disposition to commit crimes, to earn that bit over power over those with greater power in the society.Statistics on the Effects of Gun Control in America and Other CountriesCountries such as the Soviet Union and Russia has had exceedingly stringent gun controls which were successful in disarming its people of guns, and rattling few murders were associated with guns in the past. However, the Soviet Unions and Russias rate of murder is still a few multiplication higher than USA due to the substitutes of guns as weapons. Kates and Mauser (2007) points out that in places where the handiness of guns are uncommon, other potential weapons will be used as an alternative for murder. Table 1 shows the other developed countries including Germany, France and Demark) with high gun ownership but with murder rates a s low as many other developed nations which has lesser gun ownership.Despite having looser gun control than the other countries, the crime rates in USA caused by guns is not as high as the other countries with fewer civilian gun ownership. The thesis of more guns, more murder is not supported in the study done in Mauser (2007).In Table 2, it shows the gun ownership rates and homicide rates in Canada, USA and Mexico. Mexico, where gun ownership rates is nine propagation lesser than USA, has more than twice the amount of homicides as compared. Therefore, stricter gun controls on the civilians does not necessarily mean lesser crimes. Kates and Mauser (2007) concluded that law-abiding and responsible citizens who are in possession of guns will not use it unnecessarily for committing crimes, but the same cannot be applied to dangerous individuals with screen background of crimes and violence. Anyone who wants to commit a crime will unquestionably find a way to obtain any dangerous weap on for such an act.Proposed succeeding(a) Gun control Policy in the United StatesWith recent incidents such as mass shootings in schools and public areas, many have called for reforms in the gun control policies in the country. After his reinstatement as the president, President Obama hypothesize a plan to better control the possession of firearms in the United States. He in addition focuses on tackling the root of the problem, by permitting larger access to mental health services through higher financing for insurance coverage particularly for younger people. Proposed actions include stricter background checks on all gun sales, and ensuring a strong ban on assault weapons that would not commonly fit as weapons for self-defense. Better funding for emergency response plans for schools in America will be provided, to allow citizens to better act in times of similar crisis. If the proposals are accepted and initialized, it will better protect honest citizens and prevent dangerous individuals from purchasing such weapons to a higher degree.Counter ArgumentTo a certain extent, the limiting effects of gun control and presence of guns do attention in reducing the possibility of crimes conducted with guns. The presence of guns empowers and corrupts ones judgment in situations, and the improper locking and storing of guns may provide un penized individuals an opportunity to use guns to their someoneal gain.Presence of GunsGuns may go on violence by emboldening and empowering an aggressor. A gun may provide one with the control and the nerve to perform a violent act that would not be possible then, a phenomenon known as facilitation. (Hoskin, 2011). With a gun in their control, one will be more susceptible to committing crimes with a weapon that creates fear in their hands. It will absolutely motivate them to commit the crime that he or she will not be able to do without the enabling factor of guns.Gun Access and its Impact on JuvenilesIn the United States, the re are some gun control advocates who strongly believe that youth access to guns are the primary cause of school massacres, incidents that highly show the need for better gun coordination in the countries. Kleck (2009) mentions that gun possessors are relatively at fault for easy gun accessibility to youths, especially parents, if they do not hide and lock up their guns properly to deny easy access. There must be better controls set in place to prevent un sourceized access to guns, regardless to youth or other people. Ludwig (2005) acknowledges the benefits of proper security of guns as it avoids unapproved access and thus, might lessen crimes that are committed with guns. This can greatly help avert violence or even make incidents less lethal by keeping guns locked up.The availableness of gun may prompt juveniles into use them for the wrong reasons. Guns being easily available are related to the relish of crimes being committed. Mocan and Tekin (2006) found that youths who have better accessibility to guns are more inclined to commit crimes than those who do not have access to guns. It acknowledges the point whereby juvenile criminal behaviour will be affected by having an ease of obtainability of guns at home.RebuttalNegative Influence of Gun Control and the Crimes They EncourageInstead of banning guns for all the citizens of the United States, the country should quite continue the ban on certain categories of people. This is such as the prohibition of guns for vicious convicts, youths and the insane present in both American and Canadian laws, however, such regulations are tough to administer. (Mauser, 2007). With a list of high-risk individuals and having the specify causationities to monitor them, it will disarm those that are deemed dangerous with a gun, and not citizens who merely want to defend themselves.Presence of Guns do not Promote ViolenceThe presence of guns do not necessary bring a law-abiding citizen into a murder due to a moment of rage , and there are many other factors that actually contribute to the usage of guns. Kates and Mauser (2007) discuss that possibly all types of perpetrators or murderers are not ordinary citizens that abide to the law, and most of the killers are immensely deviant people with a history of violence tendencies, psychopathology, drugs exploitation and other hazardous conducts. The possession of a gun will definitely not turn someone of logical thinking and mind into a murderer.Conclusion and Future champaignThis paper had discussed the banning of guns and its impact on crime rates in America. A stricter gun control program will not necessarily reduce crime rates, as there are many other causes that lead to crimes in the country. Instead, a further restriction in guns will only deny law-abiding citizens from their best way of self-defense. Statistics in the paper have proven that higher gun ownership has no correlativity to the number of crimes committed and stricter gun controls does ha ve more negative impacts than positive bearings.Instead of just banning guns as an attempt to lower crime rates in the country, other possible ways of reducing crime ways should be considered and further developed on. Stricter gun control policies will have both positive and negative impacts, and there is a need for more research and evidence to obtain a more correct result if further control policies are beneficial in the long run. The blaming of current gun control regulations for the worsening of crimes control in the country is not absolute. It is important to research and examine the true causes of rising crime rates in America, before deciding on altering current gun control laws which may be unavailing.Annotated BibliographyKates, D. B., Mauser, G. (2007). Would banning guns reduce murder and suicide? A Review of external and Some Domestic Evidence, 30, 649-694. Retrieved from http//home.heinonline.orgKates and Mauser discuss whether the banning of guns will reduce murder a nd suicide cases. It shows several examples of countries, such as Russia and England where stricter gun controls does not lead to lower crime rates, but does the latter. However in the United States, where a more piano gun control policy is in play, crime rates are significantly lower as compared to Russia and England. The reason summarizes and uses statistics and other data to show the co-relation of possession of guns and crime rates.The authors state that the use of guns for self-defence purposes are higher than the use of guns for committing crimes. Therefore, there is a direct relation of gun ownership and lower crime rates, especially in the case of United States where gun ownership for self-defence is a considerable socio-cultural occurrence. Defensive gun ownership deters criminals from committing crimes as citizens of United States have a right to defend themselves with the use of guns when threatened. This word will be utilitarian in our research paper as it agrees with our dissent on the topic, and show that gun ownership can do more good than harm.Mauser, G. (2007). Some international evidence on gun bans and murder rates.Fraser Forum, 5, 23-27. Retrieved from http//ezproxy.library.unlv.edu/login?universal resource locator=http//search.proquest.com/docview/229332019?accountid=3611The author analysed data from United Nation studies to inspect the association between gun ownership and homicide and suicide rates. The author found that in the United States, the thesis of more guns relates to more murders is not supported. As stated in the term, the murder rate among the African-Americans is six times more than among the others, even having the lower density of the total population owning guns. The author states that the association of high gun ownership is not directly related to homicide rates. According to the clause, a law abiding citizen or a criminal-minded person having gun ownership provided the crucial factor to the link between gun owners hip and murder rates. This can be specifically used in our bind to explain that crimes can be conducted even without the possession of a gun, and law-abiding citizens should not be denied of their right to own a gun for self-defence.Kleck, G. (2009). American behavioral scientist. The worse possible case for gun control, 52(10), 1447-1464. inside10.1177/0002764209332557This word discusses about the mass shooting cases happening in schools and the lesson learnt from it. The author states that the gun control measures proposed after such aftermath were highly contrasted and could not have prevented the incidents or even reduced the death tolls. The article explains the avenues whereby citizens of the United States can obtain guns, and suggests possible methods of improving the gun control measures imposed. Statistics to show the effectiveness of such improved measure are shown. This article is very useful to support our stating that the banning of guns will not necessary lower crim e from happening.Mocan, H. N., Bali, T. G. (2010). Asymmetric crime cycles.The Review of Economics and Statistics, 92(4), 899-911. inside 10.1162/REST_a_00048This article presented the evidence of the linkage between unemployment and crimes. The authors explore the possibilities concerning people being unemployed and the fluctuations of the crimes committed in the periods of economic expansion and recession. This journal article will be helpful in our research paper as it states that the actual reason for crimes is a shaky economic and unemployment.Moorhouse, J. C., Wanner, B. (2006). Does gun control reduce crime or does crime increase gun control. Cato Journal, 26(1), 103-124. Retrieved from http//ezproxy.library.unlv.edu/login?url=http//search.proquest.com/docview/195598468?accountid=3611This article discusses about whether gun control reduces crimes or if it is the other way round. The author look ats the true meaning of gun control, and the degree of gun control required to make it actually effective. Statistics and tables are included to show if gun control affect crime rates the following year. To compare, statistics showing if crime rates affect the severity of gun control are included as well. The results failed to show a negative relationship between gun control and crime rates, and therefore assuming that gun control is ineffective to a certain degree. This article will be quite useful in our stand against stricter gun controls which leads to higher crime rates.Pressman, S. (2008). Expanding the boundaries of the economics of crime.International Journal of Political Economy,37(1), 80-80. doi10.2753/IJP0891-1916370104This passage of the article discusses about gun control and the statistics and the number of gun-related deaths each year. Via the economic analysis, it represented the worst case scenarios if guns are made illegal, which will indefinitely lead to a melanise market for guns. It argues that the lower in supply of guns does not affect the remove for it, where the high prices of guns does not deter purchases. This will only result in higher success for criminal activities, as gun control takes off the protection for law-abiding citizens. This is slightly useful in our case as the information is reliable, and supports our argument with regards to the looser gun control and lower crime rates.Hoskin, A. (2011). planetary house gun prevalence and rates of violent crime a test of competing gun theories. Criminal Justice Studies A Critical Journal of Crime, Law and Society,24(1), 125-136. doi10.1080/1478601X.2011.544445This article provides statistical data and comparisons of the topic of guns and crime rates. The author mentioned that the possession of guns will not increase the crime rates it will deter the crimes from happening in the point of victims being able to defend themselves if they do possess a gun as well. In the case of the attacker possessing the gun, the author mentioned the lowered probability of the victim being able to flee when being attacked by a shooter. The author also stated that having a gun gives the attacker the courage to commit crimes that they may not have the guts to do when without a gun. The author pointed out that the possession of guns does not increase crime rates it only aggravates the degree of assault on the victims. This article will be helpful in our stand which is against the motion that higher gun ownership is related to higher crime rates.Ludwig, J. (2005). Better gun enforcement, less crime. Criminology Public Policy, 4(4), 677-716. doi10.1111/j.1745-9133.2005.00352.xThis journal article discusses about the major federal initiative to combat gun violence via reducing gun availability and its modest impact on gun crime. It discusses about Project Safe Neighbourhoods (PSN), and explains its effectiveness on the reduction of gun crimes. The author shows evidence in how to better improve PSN by targeting at the demand rather than the supply side of the gun market. However, this source may be biased to the idea of having a better law enforcement will lower crimes, by focusing on how to improve the current initiative. This article may not be as useful as others, but it can be used to show a different opinion of how better gun control will lead to lower crimes.Mocan, H. N., Tekin, E. (2006). Guns and juvenile crime. Journal of Law and Economics, 42(2), 507-531. doi10.1086/508330This article discusses about the relation of availability of guns and the juvenile crime rates. The article offered an investigation on the effect of gun availability at home on crime done by juveniles, such as robbery, burglary, theft, and property damage. The authors specified that the easy gun availability at home is directly related to the tendency to commit crime. However, the authors also found that there is no claim that better gun availability lowers the inclination of being subjected to crime. This source helps us in our research paper, however, it o nly focuses on juveniles, and will not be as effective to debate on the citizens of United States as a whole.