Tuesday, 19 November 2013

Gun Control: For & Against



The two examples I have found offering contrasting viewpoints on increased gun control are a website listing 10 reasons why there should be more control and an interview with the author Jon Lott on his book More Guns, Less Crime.

The interview with Jon Lott challenges his ides that if the ownership of guns across America is higher, crime will decrease because criminals will be deterred by the threat of retaliation. Lott argues this point well and if is very convincing when he states that people often forget the famous statistic “58% of people killed by acquaintances” includes the likes of gang members against gang members, prostitutes against clients and drug buyers against drug dealers. This suggests that the shootings associated with these incidents is often the bi-product of other crimes. However when challenged about the instances in other countries such as Great Britain, Lott dodges the question, seemingly unaware that because guns are much more difficult to obtain in this country, the rate of shootings are much lower.


The 10 arguments for stricter gun control are far more convincing. The website backs up each statement with facts and statistics that are difficult to argue with. Examples such as, “49 of the 62 mass shootings in America over the past thirty years have been conducted with legal weapons” and, contrary to Lott’s beliefs, “92% of Americans would want background checks” to be done on any civilian wishing to bear arms. An argument that I have not previously thought of is also raised, that the rates of suicides would drop as well with the decrease of gun ownership, as is shown by states with less restrictions currently boasting double the amount of suicides over states with more control. There is then an example, similar to shooting in Dunblane, provided about Australia. A mass clampdown on gun ownership in 1996 after a mass shooting reduced mass shootings “from eleven a decade (1986-96) to zero.”

No comments:

Post a Comment