.. ing people the right to arm themselves. One of the reasons why governments exist is to protect us from ourselves in times of rage, greed, anger and other emotions for the maintaining equality in society. The government is not protecting the rights of the individual when they are allowing people to own firearms in knowing the consequential price of death and injury that is paid by so many year after year. International incidents such as the school massacre in Dunblane, Great Britain or the mass shooting in Tasmania, Australia triggered immediate effects in strengthening further the very strict existing gun control laws in their respective countries (“America and Guns” 16).

Governments in other western countries usually make adjustments to their gun laws in direct relationship to violent incidents. Massacres like these dont seem to spark the same enthusiasm among politicians to change any gun control laws significantly. The fact is that in 1996 two people in New Zealand, 15 in Japan, 30 in Britain, 106 in Canada, 211 in Germany and 9,390 in the U.S.A. were murdered with handguns. There are about 500,000 incidents, from assault to murder, that involve firearms every year and they results in 35,000 deaths, including suicides and accidents, in the U.S.

every year (“America and Guns” 16). Compared with other countries the statistics are alarming. It seems as the Americans wants to keep their guns no matter what the price. The National Rifle Association is the leading pro-gun organization in the United States. On their Internet site they describe many aspects of their organization.

An excerpt from the page describing the members of their organizations common interest reads: What members share with every other member is an appreciation of the shooting sports, belief in our constitutional right to keep and bear arms and, most of all, a commitment to safety, responsibility and freedom. (NRA) Whether or not the NRA are one of the contributing factors or not to the incredibly high firearm death statistics in the U.S., the NRA has very much political power and will do all they can to uphold the second Amendment. The part about the gun organization having a pledge to “safety, responsibility and freedom” doesnt make sense. In a survey conducted by John Hopkins Center for Gun and Policy Research and the University of Chicago revealed that most American citizens would like to see guns more strictly regulated. That means that not only do other international governments see a direct relationship between guns and death but even the American people. In 1991, one years misuse of guns claimed as many lives as the Korean War.

One and a half years total death toll from guns equaled the number of dead in Vietnam. Nine years of deaths due to misuses of firearms equals the entire death toll for World War II (ODonnel 771). Do people in the U.S. really understand how many lives that are being wasted every year because of the misuse of firearms? By 1998 legislation in 31 states, 9 since 1995 has passed laws issuing concealed weapons licenses to citizens (“America and Guns” 18). Some experts claim that letting people obtain licenses for carrying a gun while walking around in the streets is the cheapest way in lowering the horrendous statistics.

Other experts claim that arming people is never a good answer to this problem because it adds to the risk of people getting shot in anger. Actually it doesnt really matter what the experts derive out of the situation; the scariest detail is that legislators in these states have come to the conclusion that the most effective way to make America safer is to carry guns in the streets. A study of the murder rate in Washington D.C. showed that within three years of the passage of a law prohibiting the sale of handguns in the city the murder rate dropped by 25% (Kruschke 22). The state of South Carolina and the city of Boston experienced similar results when stricter gun control laws were recently enforced. In Boston the homicide rate dropped by 39% and in South Carolina the murder rate dropped by 28% (Kruschke 23). These are just some example of cities and states that have realized that strict gun control is one way of decreasing high murder rates.

According to a survey conducted by the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research revealed that the majority of Americans would like to see guns more tightly regulated (“Fire Control”). Lets face it, a shooting is national news in most western countries but in the U.S. it is merely an every day occurrence that often doesnt even get national coverage by the media. The American public is feeling the horrendous effects of violence that the second Amendment brings and many realize that something has to be done to decrease the annual death toll due to guns. The Gun Control Act of 1968 was attempt by the government to restrict the sale of guns by making sellers of guns licensed and prohibited the sale of guns or ammunition to people that are convicted felons, minors, drug users, illegal aliens or people who have been discharged from the military.

This Act was passed during the wake of the assassinations of Dr. Martin Luther King and Senator Robert Kennedy. It was huge reaction to a growing usage of handguns in the U.S. The legislators figured out that the liberty of bearing arms wasnt for everyone. Gun Control Act of 1968 has very likely contributed to a lowering the number of deaths each year than the alternative of not having laws that regulate the possession and distribution of guns. Since then things havent become better and 30 years of people shooting each other legislators are bound to realize that the personal liberty of bearing arms doesnt need to be modified but to be cancelled once and for all.

One common argument in the debate about gun control is that if guns are banned then cars will also have to be banned because cars are also responsible for many deaths each year. The truth is that the usage for cars and guns are totally. The purpose of cars is transportation and guns to launch a bullet into a target. Yes, many accidents occur with cars every year that claims the lives of many innocent people but it is very seldom that people are being hurt intentionally by drivers of cars or other vehicles. Guns nevertheless are very often used as an intentional device for killing or harming another individual.

It is important to focus on the easiness of pointing a gun in a direction and pulling the trigger, it doesnt take very long time and it might just claim the lives of one or more persons. There is not much time for second thoughts and not much time for people to react. If someone were to do intentionally murder one or more people with a car the event would take longer time, which leaves more time for the person behind the wheel to think over his or her decision. Not to mention the person or persons intended of being murdered have a lot more time to react to a speeding car than a bullet. There are a lot of things that can be used to murder someone such as: a kitchen knife, a baseball bat, a screwdriver, a sharp pencil etc.

The main reason for not banning these items is that they are not easy instruments to inflict harm with and their purpose is not to hurt people. Guns should be banned because it doesnt take much out of a person to point it and pull the trigger. The key word in this argument is easiness; the easiness to end peoples lives and thats why guns are lethal instrument that ultimately should be banned.