A subject of much debate, in recent years, is the issue of gun-related violence. Although many media outlets appear to necessitate the use of false information, related to firearms, in order to further their own anti-gun agenda, there are many falsities which must be dispelled. The fact remains that increased gun laws will only prevent the law abiding citizens from owning a firearm the criminals will still have access to them. So then, one must ask themselves, how will I protect my family or myself? If an individual is breaking into your home; wouldn’t you feel it prudent to protect your children or spouse? Or simply beg the intruder to leave as they assault you and your loved ones as you look on helplessly in horror. How can any reasonable person think themselves safe without proper means of protection? A ‘please don’t do that’ does not always work. If criminals are always going to possess firearms, why shouldn’t you? After looking at the facts presented here forth, take a moment and ponder if the anti-gun movement, fueled by groups such as Cease-Fire

After several isolated firearm crimes committed by children on school grounds in the late 1990’s many argued, “What about school shootings?” Well, according to the Department of Justice surveys and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, “only 2% of school administrators consider guns a serious problem on school grounds” (National Institute of Justice, Oct. 1998). Overall, crimes committed in schools with firearms are a fraction of 1%. (UCR 1996, 2002) In relation to school violence and children with guns, former Secretary of Education, Richard Riley stated: “The vast majority of America’s schools are still among the safest places for youngsters to be.” (White House Conference, Oct. 1998). The fact is that crime in schools, by firearms, are a fraction of 1%. In respect to Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, one has to wonder; if teachers were allowed to carry guns, might so many lives have been lost? The violence could have been stopped and children’s lives saved. Instead, helpless, fifteen people dead and twenty individuals injured on the April 20, 1999 massacre. (CNN, 1999). So what, then, is the solution? Armed guards in schools? This would certainly be a crime deterrent; what person then would attempt to shoot up a school if they, themselves, have a chance of being shot?

Looking at gun control laws which have been passed, and their results; one has to wonder why individuals are still determined to remain on such a dangerous path. Washington, D.C. placed a ban on handgun sales which took effect in 1977; by the 1990s the city’s murder rate had tripled. The majority of the murders in the city were committed by a handgun; the law did not suppress the problem it amplified it. (D.O.J. Survey 1996) In 1975, the state of California increased the waiting period on retail and private sales of handguns from five to 15 days. In 1996, California reduced the waiting period to 10 days. Since 1975, the state’s annual murder rate has been an astonishing 32% higher than the rate for the rest of the country. Maryland was another

Some topics in this essay:
Littleton Colorado, Edmund Burke, DOJ Survey, United America, Britain Australia, Crime Reports, USC Chapter, Don Kates, Washington DC, Madison Constitution, gun control, murder rate, gun laws, ucr 1996, waiting period, law abiding citizens, oct 1998, control laws, abiding citizens, united america, possess firearms, firearms fraction 1%, gun control laws, schools firearms fraction, ucr 1996 2002,