The Hand Gun Debate

A detailed Summary of The Hand Gun Debate

The level of violence in America today is one of the biggest problems the nation faces. It is virtually impossible to pick up the morning paper or turn on the evening news without seeing a story about some act of violence. Now there seems to be no safe-haven from all the madness. Shootings at work, school, and even churches have become commonplace in contemporary American culture.

There are over 200 million guns in America today; over 72 million of these are handguns (Blevins 1). Since handguns account for most of the homicides, they deserve a certain amount of investigation. Would we be better off without them? Do they serve a positive purpose? A lot of people say we should get rid of these instruments of violence all together. These people are not without great opposition though, not in this country anyway. The following is an evaluation of this debate: both sides of the argument are represented beginning with the proponents of handgun control.

The facts and figures speak loud and clear. "Although handguns make up on only about one-third for all firearms in the U.S., they account for 80% of all murders committed with firearms" (Blevins 2). This statistic is not surprising if you look at

Guns have spread like a bad disease across the fabric of American society. The amount of handguns in America "has more than doubled since 1972". By 2003 firearm-related deaths "will be the leading cause of injury related deaths" (Blevins, 1). These fatalities take a great toll on the people of this country. It is not just the mothers' and fathers' tears that result from these violent acts. Great economic costs surround the issue too. The victim's medical costs alone "range from 2.3 to 4 billion annually, of which taxpayers pay about 67% [of]" (Maryland, 2).

This is okay though, because most of those who favor handgun control also believe the police should still carry them. After all the police are the protectors of society, and are put in dangerous situations. The hypocrisy here is quite evident. If handguns are are an effective means of protection for police officers, then obviously they are an effective means of self-defense for the rest of us civilians. This country would be in bad shape if only the criminals and the police had handguns; this would leave the majority of America caught up in the crossfire between the two.

The possibility that someone is carrying a handgun is one of the greatest deterrents of crime. If attackers become more confident that their victims aren't carrying a handgun due to restrictions, then the likelihood that the victim can assert deadly force becomes minimal. Women would be at even greater risk; they would become more vulnerable because of their relatively small build compared to men.

Some will say it isn't the guns that kill people, it's the people who kill people. Maryland's Attorney General, Joseph Curran Jr. noted that "Guns beget violence and violence simply begets more guns"(Maryland, 1). Guns and handguns especially make killing ea

Some common words found in the essay are:
Handgun Debate, Europe Maryland, Rights Opponents, Institute Justice, Curran Jr, Amendment Constitution, Gottlieb USA, Bill Gottlieb, handgun control, Bill Rights, handguns easily concealed, kill people, maryland 2, handguns easily, easily concealed, carrying handgun, sawed shotguns, bill rights, blevins 1, effective means,

Approximate Word count = 1215
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)

Category: Miscellaneous