“Violence in the United States of America is a huge problem, and some may assume that guns are the cause of this. However, in reality, people come up with many more amounts of equally or more violent measures,” according to the article “Gun Control Unnecessary Unsuccessful And Unneeded Criminology” by Lindsay Thompson.

A couple weeks ago Stephen Paddock, a 64-year-old man open fired with an semi automatic weapon on a crowd of people attending a country concert in Las Vegas. The nation went silent and mourned the dead from this horrific event. The shooting caused gun control arguments around the nation. This is a touchy topic to many American people, an argument which seems to have no end.

In a recent interview, Governor of Kentucky Matt Bevin said “For those who think gun control would have prevented this, we already have laws against murder. This is a person who murdered 58 people, last I knew, hundreds wounded. There are laws against all those things. So the idea of one more law would have precluded this person from doing this is an asinine comment, it really is.”

“Gun Control Unnecessary Unsuccessful And Unneeded Criminology Essay. By Thompson” states that laws do not apply to criminals, gun laws are on the idea that it would  make the nation a safer place by eliminating the civilian population to guns. For criminals, laws usually don’t cross their mind when they are about to do something. The only thing on their mind is the job and not getting caught unless they intend to. Laws against murder and violence do not apply to a person about to commit a mass shooting.

The weapon used on the Texas shooting was described as a full auto weapon. The weapon was actually semi auto but had an attachment called a bump fire stock. Bump fire stocks are legal modifications that simulate automatic fire. The modified stock harnesses the energy from recoil, forcing the firing mechanism to move faster than originally designed.

Bump Fire Stocks are legal because it is incapable of initiating an automatic firing cycle that continues until either the finger is released or the ammunition is exhausted. Firearms Technology Branch (FTB) finds that the product is not a machine gun as defined under the Gun Control Act, 18 U.S.C.921(a)(23).

On Jan 20th, 1920 the ban on alcohol production and distribution went into effect. Though it was illegal people didn’t care about the ban of alcohol  which was a law. In turn the alcohol actually flourished and there was more alcohol then there was before the ban. The ban also allowed a criminal mastermind like Al Capone to take over the production of a certain city and became very wealthy due  to his control on distribution of alcohol. This could be the same events we might see if guns are outright banned and restricted. Said Listverse list “10 Arguments for Gun Control” by Morris M.

It is likely that gun control laws are not going to stop a criminal if they are determined to hurt people. If personal guns were to be restricted or limited, families would be in danger if a situation occurred where someone tried to attack them. Every family should be permitted to have as many firearms they need in order to stay safe and sound.

In 1976, Washington D.C. implemented a gun ban on civilians. Only police officers were able to have firearms. According to prosecutor Jeffrey Shapiro, the results were not good. Annual homicides rose from 188 in 1976 to 364 in 1988, and then increased even further to 454 in 1993. The gun ban was lifted by the Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, and homicides have steadily declined since then to 88 yearly murders in 2012.

“Gun control it’s good when used for background checks for people when buying guns but I  don’t think that they need to use gun control to not allow us to have guns and besides if someone  is going to murder  someone they are gonna do it with anything they can get their hands on.” said Hannah Rippberger, OHS senior

Thompson says, “Limiting the use and sale of firearms is essentially an attempt to maintain public order. People also challenge the rights of the government to regulate such things. Although the government is supposedly trying to achieve order and peace, they are not going to receive these things through regulation and restriction of guns.”

“No, because criminals get guns no matter what is illegal or legal,” OHS senior and a member of the high school trap team Chris Spacek said. In addition, he believes guns for the most part are used in the right way for self defense and hunting.

The restriction of possession of guns is not only unnecessary and unsuccessful, it is also completely impractical. Limiting the number of firearms a citizen can have is useless and a waste of time. Criminals will find a way to have more firearms with them. Criminals are the ones we should be concerned with not people with the right to posses a firearm. According to Thompson

Rippberger added in an interview that “guns are a tradition in our family and if we have stricter gun laws than they are ripping apart traditions that have been running within families for generations.”

The Daily Wire stated that “The Crime Research Prevention Center determined that since 1950, nearly 99 percent of mass public shootings have occurred in gun-free zones. The terror attack in Orlando, FL and the shooting that murdered singer Christina Grimmie in June also took place in gun-free zones. The reason is obvious: deranged murderers want to be in a position to murder as many as possible, so they target areas where they’re least likely to find armed resistance, which happen to be gun-free zones.”

A study published in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy answering the question, “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide? A Review of International and Some Domestic Evidence.” The study found that a nation with more guns tends to have less crime and there is no correlation between gun ownership and violent crimes..

In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that the bill of rights included a guarantee of the personal right to own a gun.

The Constitution states that every citizen has the right to bear arms and that any infringement upon this right in unconstitutional. Implementing gun control laws is a prime example of infringing upon the right to bear arms, and therefore is unconstitutional, as well as completely unacceptable, according to Thompson.