Running Head: Gun Control 1

Gun Control and Its Controversy: A Review of the Literature

Mario Adrian Ponce
The University of Texas at El Paso


























Gun Control 2
Abstract
The Gun Control Argument has been a controversy to many Americans due to the
incidents that have been occurring. This literature review will inform the reader with the
valid points people are trying to get across such as using statistics, personal experiences
and a personal interview with a gun salesman. The history of Gun Control has been all
over the charts but with its reliability, one can be informed in a formal manner.


































Gun Control 3


Gun Control and Its Controversy

Whats the United States without its citizens owning weapons? As our ancestors
back in time created the Second Amendment, giving us safety and the right to bear arms
but now; the controversy on trying to take that away from us? This has been a topic that
has taken over lately discussing if it would be correct to ban weapons. The creation of the
whole Gun Control argument sparked up with an incident in Sandy Hook when a random
gunman entered an elementary and killed many young and innocent children and
teachers. As correspond to these tragic events, riots began to form demanding for
weapons to be banned and such complementary actions.
With the anti groups being formed and many debates being created, just because
of the tragic events that occurred is it necessary for weapons to be banned? Of course
many weapons that are available to citizens are dangerous but with this is mind, other
actions perhaps should be taken. Many American are not fully informed with the Gun
Control debate but in order to learn more about it and fully comprehend, four important
questions should be considered:
1. Is it necessary enforcing stronger laws towards weapons?
2. Does gun control reduce violent crime?
3. Is it correct to negotiate around the second amendment in favor of citizens
safety?
4. Do individuals have a right to protect their own life, lives of their family members
and property?
Gun Control 4
The following review of literature will: provide information regarding the solutions that
have been opinionated for Gun Control, the statistic rates that actually have to deal with
weapons and what ground the Second Amendment stands between Gun Control and
truthful meaning.
Is it necessary enforcing stronger laws towards weapons?
The biggest question around is the necessity for stronger laws towards weapons
necessary? If so, how would it affect the people that already have weapons and would it
be possible due to having our Second Amendment? Research has shown that States with
nondiscretionary concealed handgun laws have 25 percent fewer rapes than States that
restrict or forbid women from carrying concealed handguns (Trotter, 2013, p. 25). If
there were to be creations of new laws not only will it just affect the gun owners, but it
will affect many in many ways. Depending in the levels on how strong the laws were to
be created, it may affect gun owners severely. For example, in 1976, Washington passed
a strict gun law and immediate result were shown as Figure 1 below explains:

Gun Control 5
With this explanation, one can see how powerful a law can affect Gun Control in such a
negative way. As murder rates went up drastically in DC, it even dropped down across
the nation. During my research I interviewed Hector Balderrama, a gun salesman at
Academy Sports and Outdoors, who encounters guns everyday. During our interview I
asked him, Are stronger laws necessary towards weapons? and he responded Some
laws would be beneficial but at the end, these laws will abuse their power and will
eventually want to get rid of weapons instead of just enforcing stronger restrictions.
Making such a clear point, enforcing stronger laws are in a position where there should
be or just nothing at all. As well it will be interfering with the Second Amendment but
that point will be explained later on.
Does gun control reduce violent crime?
A very controversial question is if gun control reduces violent crime, due to the
fact that guns relate to these kinds of crimes. This has been a very debatable question and
a very clear point was made by Professor Zimiring in his article. If one has a motive to
kill and by chance he/she has a gun, that crime will be committed in a faster manner.
What Zimmering explains is that if an individual wants to kill someone and they dont
have a gun, that crime will still be committed with a different object. As he said, It has
been argued, however, that eliminating guns would have no such effect because if
someone wants to kill, he will find a weapon to achieve his destructive goal; there is, it is
said, more than one way to skin a cat (Zimring, 1968, p.721). Guns can be a faster object
to kill someone but truly, one will think of another way to kill due to its motive. Not only
Gun Control 6
will it not reduce crime, but it will give an opportunity for crime rates to even increase
due to the fact of not having a concealed weapon as protection.
It is said that a good amount of the total violent crimes relate to guns, but what no
one truly understands is that giving these weapons also stop violent crimes. Why take
away the protection of many citizens and give criminals a better chance on committing
violent on innocent people? Violent actions will occur in no matter what situation, if the
person has a bat, rock or scissors, that action will be done if they really want to. People
only see the bad in guns but as well, they stop much of the violent crime and indeed save
many lives.
The following image is an example or presentable misunderstanding that people
have with crime rates:

Gun Control 7
Illustration 2 above is a great explanation on how weapons can protect ones life. This
statistic explains to one how having a gun can actually reduce the rates of crimes. As gun
ownership increased, violent crimes began to decreased due to the guns serving as
protection to many. In conclusion, the diminish of weapons not only have an effect, but it
will have a negative effect causing an exposure to innocent people to criminals.
Is it correct to negotiate around the Second Amendment in favor of citizens safety?
1791 was when the Second Amendment, the right to bear arms, was ratified. It not
only served as just a regular amendment but it gave the safety and power to many
citizens. The type of power that would not be able to be abused but serve as protection.
This power to the citizens will also be helpful just incase if the government were to
become a tyrant and the weapons will be used as protection towards the government. In
the article Gun Control Overview it states, Opponents of gun control vary in their
positions with respect to specific forms of control but generally hold that gun control
laws do not accomplish what is intended. They argue that it is difficult to keep weapons
from being acquired by high-risk individuals, even under Federal laws and
enforcement, as it was to stop the sale and use of liquor during Prohibition (2013,
Congressional Digest). The biggest misunderstanding that opponents of gun control have
is that the Second Amendment was created for a reason. There is not chance in the world
that it would be correct to override the amendment that was created by the creators of our
country. Just because a couple of incidents have occurred, it does not give the full right to
eliminate guns from the citizens of America. Guns serve as a purpose and that is to gain
protection from them. Yes they have been abused at times, but it does not give the full
Gun Control 8
right to eliminate them just because of the incidents and expose everyone to more even
tragic situations. In conclusion, the Second Amendment was created for our protection,
not for it to be abused. If there were to be a chance to override it for example, then all
other amendments would have power, to make it in a short note, then the whole
Constitution does not have a true purpose if one wants to change a amendment. As the
Second Amendment serves us as protection, this will lead us to the last lit question.
Do individuals have a right to protect their own life, lives of their family
members and property?
Illustration 3 will be provided first in this question to create a though in ones head
first:

The illustration above can have many meaning to one. But the main reason it was
creating was to inform one how guns can serve to people when violent situations were to
come about. It is not the act of killing an individual but it is the act of protecting ones self
and maybe even multiple people such as your family. In a source provided, speaks a
Gun Control 9
woman about a story she would never forget. She informs the audience how two intruders
broke into her home while she was alone with her child. As they broke into her home, she
knew the protection of her child was on her hand and of course she wasnt going to let
anything happen to him. She then fired her weapon and injured one of the intruders while
the other one ran away. In fact she even said, Guns make women safer. Most violent
offenders actually do not use firearms, which makes guns the great equalizer ( Trotter,
2013, p. 25). She states that over 90 percent of violent crimes towards women are
actually without a weapon due to the male having such a greater physical strength and
size. As well she explains that carrying a weapon herself puts her in such a much safer
situation and comfort. With that being said, Research has shown that States with
nondiscretionary concealed handgun laws have 25 percent fewer rapes than States that
restrict or forbid women from carrying concealed handguns (Trotter, 2013, p. 25)
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Gun Control debate is going to be an argument where both
sides are not going to end their fight. People have a misunderstanding about weapons
making them seen as bad objects but in reality, they serve as protection to many from the
evil in this world. For now, Gun Control is a steady argument with both sides aiming at
each other.



Gun Control 10

References
Dreier, P. (2013). Massacres and Movements: Challenging the Gun Industrial Complex.
New Labor Forum (Sage Publications Inc.), 22(2), 92-95. Retrieved from
http://0web.b.ebscohost.com.lib.utep.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=24f72
44-aa8b-4714-a63d-470162d74c87%40sessionmgr113&vid=6&hid=119
Gun Control Overview. (2013). Congressional Digest, 92(3), 3-7. Retrieved from
http://0-web.b.ebscohost.com.lib.utep.edu/ehost/results?sid=24f72544-aa8b-4714
a63d470162d74c87%40sessionmgr113&vid=1&hid=119&bquery=gun+control
bdata=JmRWE5aCZ0eXBlPTEmc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZlJnNjb3BlPXNpdGU=

Trotter, G. S. (2013). Should Congress Pass Stronger Gun Laws?. Congressional Digest,
92(3), 25-31. Retrieved from http://0
web.b.ebscohost.com.lib.utep.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=24f72544
aa8b-4714-a63d-470162d74c87%40sessionmgr113&vid=3&hid=119
Zimring, Frank. (1968). Is Gun Control Likely to Reduce Violent Killings. JStore, 8 (4),
721-737. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1598883?uid=3739920&uid=2134&uid=
&uid=70&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21103960408753
ZORNICK, G. (2013). Walmart: America's No. 1 Gun Source. Nation, 296(1/2), 15-20.
Retrieved from http://0
web.b.ebscohost.com.lib.utep.edu/ehost/results?sid=24f72544-aa8b-4714-a63d
470162d74c87%40sessionmgr113&vid=1&hid=119&bquery=gun+control&bda
=JmRiPWE5aCZ0eXBlPTEmc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZlJnNjb3BlPXNpdGU=











Gun Control 11