A genuine solution to gun violence does NOT sit with regulating law-abiding citizens. It must be obvious – even to pea-brained politicians – that the causes of gun violence are criminals.
While it’s easy for the government to punish the innocent through legislation and feel as though they’re addressing the problem, increased legislation targeting law-abiding citizens will have absolutely no impact on crimes committed by criminals with guns.
“Why maybe not? “, you may ask. It’s simple: criminals break the law so it’s impossible to enact a specific law which will stop criminals from perpetrating crimes. Laws that merely make it more challenging for someone to protect themselves or their families only work to benefit the criminal.
If I were a criminal, I know I’d target people who weren’t likely to, or couldn’t, fight. It’s much safer for the criminal that way, and they don’t need to get hurt while committing crimes any longer than the victim wants to get harm during a crime. Doesn’t this seem sensible? So tell me: how does it create any sense to hand criminals EVEN MORE victims through legislation? It certainly doesn’t make sense, but it’s easier to feel as though you’re addressing the problem if you’re doing something – even when it’s the wrong thing.
There are two root causes of gun violence that need to be addressed, and are mainly overlooked since addressing them is difficult. Those two issues are: 1 . ILLEGAL guns, and 2 . Bad guys.
While screaming about “gun control, ” it’s proponents seem to disregard a very real and true reality: that guns don’t, and have by no means, killed ANYONE. It’s the PERSON who does the killing. It’s the PERSON who produced that choice and committed the act. The PERSON chose to put that gun in their hand and pull the trigger.
If you cherished this article and you also would like to receive more info concerning Sig Sauer P938 nicely visit our site.
The gun is merely an instrument.
And I can hear gun control proponents saying, “But guns make it easier to kill! ” I freely admit that guns causes it to be more convenient to kill a larger quantity of victims. But truthfully, a criminal who wants to commit such an act will see a tool. Someone running around the mall with a samurai sword can kill just as many people before police arrive as can someone with a gun. Someone could drive a car through the mall and kill a bunch of people too. Or simply blow them up. There are many ways to accomplish such a thing, and it’s the person, not the instrument, who is responsible. We, as a society, need to keep in mind that.
And let’s not forget that we accept other things into our lives that kill far more people than even illegal guns – legally prescribed medication, for example. On average, legally prescribed medicines kill over 100, 000 people per year – second only to cardiovascular disease. But no one mentions that, and people deaths are accepted because medicines help millions of others. Well, not surprisingly, legally armed citizens, and law enforcement, use guns to thwart or stop many thousands of crimes every year – crimes that could easily have ended in the victim’s death. Yet the media fails to mention that, too.
So what do we do about gun violence?
As previously mentioned, we need to focus on stopping illegal guns, and criminals who commit violent acts. Even though these are much harder than punishing the innocent, they’re the only real things that will have a positive effect and help to reduce gun violence.
Stopping illegal guns is difficult, since there are varied sources for illegal guns. I suspect the main way to obtain illegal guns used in most neighborhood crimes is theft from properties and businesses. If that’s true, it may be wise to focus legislation upon gun security, rather than gun handle.
But even more important is to focus on scammers – the criminals who rob the guns, then use them to victimize the populace. The solution to the problem is more simple than it may seem at first glance. However , our legal system would have to be adapted to these solutions, and it also may also be necessary to address housing the temporarily increased number of prisoners. Yet , by using these solutions, I solidly believe the number of criminals will inevitably decrease.
Here are the solutions I believe will help to drastically reduce violent criminal offenses:
1) The punishment needs to EXTEND PAST the crime. Prison could be a discouraging factor to crime if the price of receiving caught – for even slight offenses – is much greater than the actual gain. I believe that any violent convicted of any sort of assault needs to have a minimum 25 year sentence without having parole. That may seem extreme, although that’s the only way to use incarceration as a deterrent.
2) No halted sentences. If they do the crime, they certainly the time.
3) Have a nationalized death penalty for extreme cases.
4) Allow citizens to protect themselves and their families without fear of legal retaliation ? vengeance from criminals or their families. A person who legally and correctly defends their very own life should NOT have to be subjected to any kind of legal proceeding brought by the criminal or even their family. If local law enforcement officials investigation finds the action normal, then the matter is dropped and everybody can happily accept that an arrest got what was due.
5) Think about implementing standards for gun storage in the home or business, to reduce the possibilities of criminals breaking in and attaining guns.
6) Make a thorough background check necessary to purchase a gun. There’s no harm in having a permit system to purchase guns. This maintains the right to invest in, and may help weed out some people that have no business owning a firearm. They have OK if this initial background check and having the permit to purchase takes a short amount of time. Chances are good that someone who wishes a firearm in a hurry wants the item for an illicit purpose.
7) Try to make tactical firearms training mandatory for everyone who is wishes to carry a weapon. Create home defense training mandatory for anybody who wishes to have a firearm at home for defense. A system similar to getting a drivers license is reasonable. Get a support to learn, take the training, then require a test to prove you can properly use the training. That may seem like the “infringement” of Second Amendment rights, but I believe it’s a necessary intrusion since other people’s lives can be deeply affected by defensive actions a lawfully armed person may take. In addition , really foolish to have the gun without the instruction. It’s unsafe for everyone under these circumstances, and I find it reasonable to have some sort of minimum training standard which will ensures proficiency and protects the security of others.