Research Paper for Gun Control to Solve The Problem of Mass Shootings in The United States

Thesis statement: stricter gun control laws should be enacted and implemented in the United States to solve the problem of mass shootings and reduce crime within its borders.

Background

Do people involved with mass violence suffer from mental illness, or are our gun laws being taken advantage of? What leads up to that point of no return, how we can prevent acts of mass shootings from occurring less if prevent them from happening at all. We have shootings that date as far back the 1840’s. The first dated school shooting that has been recorded was on November 15th 1 840, almost 160 years ago. While the motive is still unsure we can prove that in the modern era shootings often end with a suspect being confirmed to have carried severe mental issues along with a twisted backstory. We don’t pay enough attention to both of the major factors in the equation, the gun laws in America and the prevention of mental illness to worsen, as painful as it is to say it happens worldwide and it happens much more than it should, to the point where it's almost considered common, which is incredibly inconsolable and tragic. Evelyn Parrish states that clients whom indulge themselves in violent behaviors can trace as far back to suffering a traumatic event that their brains can’t let go of which can trigger taking extreme measures to release that stressor, being unstable mentally impacts the way that person views themselves in the world as a result

People can continue to debate whether or not violence is linked to patients with mental illnesses, the statistics are arising, these illnesses are often traced back to how this person grew up, the environment along with the society alongside them, neglected and isolated is how they perceive themselves, often the way parents raise their children in that neglect and abuse can indeed affect how that child views not just themselves but the world around them. The way they observe themselves is important, when they grow up in negative or hostile environments they never learn to deal with certain emotions, which is extremely heartbreaking because they never find a positive, therapeutic source of support in order to help themselves, they feel like a tremendous burden in people’ lives, they don't realize they hurt people till the consequences catch up to them, when reading the transcript to Nikolas Cruz’ interrogation, he says that he feels like blacked out, like the entire thing was hazy, he knew what he was doing was wrong but couldn’t take control of his own mind. He kept bringing up a ‘demon’ a voice inside of his head that told him to do depraved things. “You know how everyone has a good and bad side? That's my bad side taking control.” You can’t say that people like Nikolas are stable, the way he talks about his evil side is the corrupt mental stability of his, the way he grew up wasn’t a childhood some people are accustomed to. He’s gone through the countless deaths of multiple family members along with his adoptive parents, while that doesn’t justify the malicious things he’s done, it makes you realize what leads a person up to that point. It’s not just a rush of impressions that comes in overnight.

Introduction: Weapon control is a disputable subject in the United States of America. In the wake of such a significant number of grievous mass shootings, similar to the recent Las Vegas Shooting, The unavoidable firearm culture in the United States of America is a making of the nation's boondocks extension, progressive roots, pilgrim history, and the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment stipulates, 'A well-managed Militia, being important to the security of a free State, the privilege of the individuals to keep and remain battle ready, will not be encroached'. The contention fronted by defenders of stricter weapon control laws is that the revision focused on civilian armies and not the normal resident. They are of the view that firearm control limitations have consistently been there and that they serve to improve the security of the nation and the different states. The adversaries anyway contend that through the arrangements of the Second Amendment, people reserve the option to possess weapons. Their view is that people need firearms for self-preservation and that weapon possession defeats crimes. This argumentative essay contends that stricter weapon control laws ought to be sanctioned and actualized if the United States is to tackle the issue of mass shootings and diminish wrongdoing inside its fringes.

Body

On the first of October, 2017, the US saw one of the most exceedingly awful mass shooting frequencies in its history, presumably the most awful. The shooting, as seen by Swift (2017), was directed by a typical person that was a weapon lover. Following the occurrence, there has been anger and disarray everywhere throughout the nation concerning whether the weapon control discussion is as yet significant. An incredible 59 individuals passed on in the occurrence with 500 others supporting genuine wounds. This rate alone, the Second Amendment in any case, explains why the nation is in critical need of severe firearm control laws. Nothing can make up for human life and it is surprisingly more terrible when life is lost on account of another individual. It turns out to be progressively genuine when one individual chooses to kill, ceaselessly to think, the same number of individuals as time and different components would enable them to! The most recent firearm rate is a reasonable sign that the risk of lives being lost because of abuse of individual weapons is more genuine than the danger of one losing their life because of absence of self-protection.

Given the most recent mass shooting occurrence, together with such other past rates, it could be securely contended that the Second Amendment is being misjudged to mean what the designers of the Constitution never proposed nor implied. The opportunity has already come and gone that the three parts of the central government, together with the states, looked for an unmistakable reinterpretation of 'well-directed civilian army'. It can't be that the individuals who affected this correction 'approved' what was as of late seen in Las Vegas. As pointed out by Insana R. (2017), 'The Founding Fathers, who lived before the innovation of the Gatling firearm, couldn't have imagined regular citizens telling the privilege to chase turkeys, or people, with present day savagery'. The Second Amendment is without a doubt not a room for residents to have boundless rights to possess firearms. A well-controlled volunteer army ought to infer that a state, or the nation, enough serves its law requirement organizations with the correct ammo and weaponry in order to guarantee security. This has anyway lamentably been misjudged to mean anybody can claim a weapon. Stricter weapon control laws would diminish passings coming about because of separately possessed firearms.

Street, C. (2016) reports that somewhere in the range of 1999 and 2013, the quantity of weapon passings totaled to 464,033. Out of this, 270,237 were weapon suicide cases, 9,983 were inadvertent passings, while 174,773 were murders. It is in this manner perfectly clear that mass shooting isn't the main manner in which firearms are being utilized for inappropriate purposes. It is rising that giving an American native the privilege to possess a weapon is similar to giving them a shorter method for executing their detestable arrangement of murdering themselves, in the event that they had it that is. On the off chance that a firearm is intended for self-preservation and wrongdoing aversion, isn't weapon suicide the definite inverse of this? In actuality, one would be more secure from their own selves without a firearm than with a weapon. This is the reason it ought to be made colossally hard for individuals to procure firearms. Rivals of firearm control laws contend that presentation of such laws would prevent individuals a sense from securing wellbeing by encroaching upon their entitlement to self-preservation. This contention is unaware of the way that feeble firearm control laws bargain even the security of the weapon holder oneself.

Besides, it is the job of the government to guarantee that each American resident is constantly protected independent of the piece of the nation they get themselves. Building and keeping up solid security offices is sufficient to guarantee this. On a similar note, the 'right to self-protection' contention would lose its significance if an individual can't above all else shield themselves against themselves. At the point when an individual purposely or accidentally hurts themselves utilizing a firearm they claim, it implies they come up short on the exceptionally self-protection they procured the weapon for.

Conclusion

The enactment and implementation of terribly strict regulation laws by the United States of America is long over its time. Individuals cannot continue slaughtering innocent people in the name of enjoying the provisions of the Second amendment. If it's the Second amendment that's making all this loss of life and lawlessness, it ought to be completely reinterpreted so it works within the best interest of all Americans. No one has the right mind when taking their own life and the lives of others. It's tragic that gun possession perpetuates this development. This research paper reveals that gun possession is neither promoting self-protection nor deterring crime however promoting the same thing.