Preventing Gun Violence: Checks Firearms Acquired

The United States is home to approximately 5% of the world’s population and 31% of all mass shootings. In these shootings and various other methods of gun violence, thousands of people die every year. Gun-related deaths are mostly from murder and kids unintentionally shooting themselves. Those who are for gun control are normally to believe that guns should be destroyed, but the second amendment inhibits lawmakers from being able to do so. In order to overcome these problems, different gun control answers must be created for each one. Gun-related murders can be lessened using common background checks. Additionally, unintentional shootings can be diminished through the use of new firearm technologies. The problem of gun violence in America can be lessened through the utilization of stronger restrictions when buying firearms.

One popular restriction that could decrease gun violence is the use of background checks for all firearms acquired in the United States. Implementing this law would end the use of the private seller loophole that doesn’t require sellers, for example, those at gun shows, to use a background check. A top-secret investigation in New York City discovered that 62% of online sellers acknowledge continuing to sell firearms after the possible buyer said, they would not pass a background check. Hence, with no background checks, is essential so that absolutely anybody can buy a firearm: for example, felons, domestic abusers, and drug abusers. The use of these background checks for all purchases will keep guns out of hands that are not worthy, while still allowing citizens that abide to the laws take advantage of their second amendment rights.

When states put in universal background checks, it has been proven to help reduce gun violence. Crime statistics tend to go down once this restriction is put in place. Research indicates that these states have 38% fewer women shot to death by their partners, 17% fewer aggravated assaults involving firearms, 48% less gun trafficking, and 53% fewer gun suicides than the national average. Additionally, the number of police killed on duty is cut in half. Also, these states usually see a decrease in gun-used murder statistics. For example, TIME magazine states that Rhode Island endured a 10.6% decrease in gun-related murder rates after putting universal background checks to work. So, there are many facts showing that background checks are useful at cutting down on gun-related violence.

Universal background checks are essential for making sure no one who purchases a gun has a record of violent tendencies that would lead them to use this weapon in a malicious way. A report by the International Association of Chiefs of Police stated that without background checks, guns are very easily exchanged by people who typically are banded, such as criminals. When these prohibited people acquire firearms, the IACP concluded that the guns are often used for gun violence. A survey that was completed confirmed this by asking questions to prisoners who had used guns to comit crimes in thirteen states with the least gun restrictions. This survey found that over three-quarters of the inmates did not go through a background check to buy the gun used in their crime. Also, 96.1% of that 86.6% would not have passed that background check. Therefore, states that do not require universal background checks are making it easy for criminals to get access to guns. Thus, logically it would make sense to require universal background checks in order to decrease gun violence committed by criminals who are acquiring their firearms through private sellers.

The necessity of universal background checks is emphasized when looking at states that do not require them. According to TIME magazine, 40% of all guns purchased in 2015 were sold without background checks. States who choose to opt-out of universal background checks in order to protect gun shows and private sellers ultimately pay the price. According to a John Hopkins study, in 2007, when the state of Missouri decided to repeal the permit-to-purchase law requiring proof of a background check before purchasing firearms, gun-related deaths increased 50% higher than the national average; this includes the firearm homicide rate that increased 23%. The study also concluded that it was now easier for criminals to purchase guns because their previous law violations were not an obstruction as they were before. Therefore, the lack of universal background checks in certain states has been shown to increase gun violence, making it clear that requiring this restriction would help reduce gun violence.

On another note, many believe that there should be restrictions preventing everyone who is mentally ill from purchasing firearms. A large part of this is due to the perception of people with mental illnesses as violent and incapable of controlling themselves. This only worsens when people automatically judge those who commit violent acts as ‘crazy’. According to The Columbian, using the word ‘crazy’ as an insult towards criminals stigmatizes mental disorders and makes people suffering with them afraid to seek help in fear of being judged. Therefore, treating mentally ill people like they are threats to society has the possibility to prevent those who are suffering from seeking the help they need. This correlates to the fact that most gun violence committed by mentally ill people is due to their conditions being untreated. Thus, restricting them from buying guns would likely increase gun violence, rather than reduce it because it could make them fearful of being vocal about needing treatment. Additionally, although those with mental disorders are violent, Richard A. Friedman, a professor of clinical psychiatry, found that “Only about 4 percent of violence in the United States can be attributed to people with mental illnesses.' Therefore, singling mentally ill citizens out as incapable of handling guns is not only harmful to the stigmatization of mental illnesses, it is illogical.