Pomposity is freeing. The same individuals who are most practiced about weapons in America, and need to shun and even appropriate whole classes of using guns, know minimal about them and apparently feel no shame to learn. The most exceedingly awful fear assault in the United States since 9/11 has turned into the event for another excited, inadequately educated push for new weapon confinements. President Obama gave a prime-time address on the dread danger, in which he unfalteringly re-asserted business as usual in the crusade against ISIS. But that he trusts that gun control, one of the sign political and strategy disappointments of our time, will now be conveyed to thwart the whole world destroying fear bunch. Every time there is a mass shooting, there is a race to push old firearm control chestnuts paying little mind to their appropriateness. Therefore, there have been distinguished discussions and heated debates concerning the control of guns. Here there are two distinguished antagonists. Those who push for control of the gun and those who are anti-gun control all are in disagreement. Each and every group has its comprehension and interpretation of the matter. Pew Research Center indicates that two years after the frustration of Senate enactment to extend historical verifications on weapon buys, people, in general, proceeds to overwhelmingly bolster making private firearm deals and deals at firearm shows subject to individual verifications. Right now, 85% of Americans – including huge greater parts of Democrats (88%) and Republicans (79%) – support extended personal investigations, minimally changed from May 2013 (81%). Thus, this clearly shows that the Senate failed in enactments of the control policies (Yen 680).
There are several reasons why people reject control of guns. One of the most notable of them is the fact that there is rising terrorism. It is evident that the terrorist is becoming more witty and knowledgeable in the way they conduct their terror activities. They closely monitor the security agents before planning and executing attacks. With the aid of the advanced technology, it has been proving difficult and engaging for the government of the United States to fully neutralize these threats. The citizens, therefore, have been trying as much as possible to ensure that the gun control policies are lifted. This is on the argument that in the case of a terror attack, there is a ready defensive mechanism. Also, some argue that by having the gun; one can easily protect himself from other criminal activities such as murder, rape, and theft. To some extent this is very true to someone who reasons. But for the government, doing this is not a simple event. Laws and regulations must be passed, amended and documented (Langbein at el., 414).
The issue has attracted discussion between protecting the American rights vs. gun ownership control. While there is wide backing for a few particular firearm strategy recommendations – and supposition on these measures has not changed essentially since 2013 – general society keeps on being all the more equally partitioned in basic mentalities about whether it is more imperative to control weapon proprietorship or to secure the rights of Americans to own guns. As of now, half say it is more essential to control weapon possession while 47% say it is more imperative to secure the rights of Americans to be entitled guns. This is a close margin. It means that the country is divided into two. There is no majority or minority group.
The whole issue has attracted the political arena. The president and his government must ensure that they resolve this issue amicably. One of the reasons that this issue must be is trending and attracting the government’s actions is because it concerns urgent issues. A matter dealing with human rights and human life is a serious issue. Regarding that, the government must find a lasting solution to ensure that it does not create loopholes in the government. The opposition and other individuals or organizations with ill motives can use these loopholes to fulfill their agendas.
Research reveals that there have been no much transformations in the National Rifle Association (NRA). In fact, it is observed that they are becoming polarized by politics and ideologies. The data concerning gun control indicates that an approximate of 40 per cent of the citizens say that NRA impacts on gun control. It is notable that these opinions have not been changing since the year 2000. This clearly means that people rarely change their minds on issues that are very sensitive. The government of the United States must, therefore, fight to ensure that amicable solution is reached with immediacy. The rights of the citizens and the laws must all be valued and followed. The long term effects of any decision that is made must be visualized. Some decisions especially that have far-reaching political consequences require that the government be extra careful. (Kopel 5).
It is clear that anti-gun control plays a vital role in the politics of the Unite States of America. The government must work to ensure that this issue is well settled. The issue as been compared with one major another issue. This is gun control vs. Human rights of owning guns. Yes, the laws may entitle individuals to own firearms but there is a bid dilemma associated. Does the government support this? What does the religious institution have to say on these issues? Thus, it is imperative that the gun control policies align with the government policies and the human rights.
- Pew Research Center US politics and Policy: “Gun Rights vs. Gun Control”, 2015.
- Langbein, Laura I., and Mark A. Lotwis. “The political efficacy of lobbying and money: Gun control in the US House, 1986.” Legislative Studies Quarterly (1990): 413-440.
- Yen, Alfred C. “What Federal Gun Control Can Teach Us About the DMCA’s Anti-Trafficking Provisions.” Wisconsin Law Review 2003.4 (2003): 673-695.
- Kopel, David B. The Samurai, the Mountie, and the Cowboy: Should America Adopt the Gun Controls of Other Democracies?. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2002.