Should there be less restricting laws related to gun control?

  • Gun control laws infringe our right to bear arms

    The strict mandates by government on gun control hinders the right to bear arms, in protecting property and family, the choice of entertainment and sport, and securing one’s safety and well-being in life-threatening situations. Although the police force in communities are there to insure safer communities, the right to bear arms with an individual insures further safety measures in personal attacks to family and property. Assault rifles are a lot more efficient in doing these.

  • Gun Control laws should be loosened

    The government is mostly worried about guns getting into the hands of buying them illegally, but if we restrict people who are laxness or don't have any criminal records people will still be illegally buying guns illegally then the citizens without guns will be rendered defenseless. Gun safety laws will only put us in more danger.

  • No Laxity In Gun Control Laws

    Allowing less restricting laws related to gun control will only cause more death and injury. Guns were designed to do only one thing. If more people get their hands on weapons, only one thing can happen. Guns do not provide safety, they promote violence. It's too easy to use one if you have one.

  • No, gun control laws should not be loosened

    Gun control laws should be strict and unrelenting. Although people should have the right to defend themselves, some individuals use guns to take away others' right to live. School shootings and other forms of gun violence are a direct result of the government's lenience concerning gun control laws. A gun is a powerful weapon that should not be given away freely.

  • No, there should not be less restricting laws related to gun control.

    Although the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States permits people to own and possess guns, the ability to do so is not absolute. Federal, state and local governments have the legal authority to enact certain, reasonable laws dealing with what types of weapons can be owned, where they can be taken and how they can be utilized.

  • No, there should be more restricting laws on gun control.

    The freedom to bear arms was granted during a time when foreign enemies, natives and wildlife posed real threats to a person's safety. These threats don't exist anymore, and neither does the need for widespread firearm possession. Guns used for hunting are understandable and permissible, but there is no need for anyone to own a semi-automatic assault rifle. Laws should be made to restrict gun ownership and sales in order to prevent the persistent gun violence that arises from these weapons.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.