Search and Destroy

8 August 2017

Cabins, Lance Vincent, M. ALL-A Search and Destroy The people of the state Utah, were shocked to find a murder which occurred in the night. Police came to the scene, only to the find the corpse off 5-year old girl. Apparently, the girl was murdered by her mother due to a heated argument and a mix of alcohol. The crime was not a surprise, but what surprised the people was the weapon used: A spatula. Quite an odd story isn’t it? However, this was a real occurrence back in July 2005. That news is evidence that when it comes to crime, everything is a weapon.

This meaner that even the tiniest object can be fatal against a person, and not only the ‘bigger’ weapons such as guns. Many activists claim that through a total gun ban, crime rate would efficiently go down in the Philippines. Furthermore, they claimed that it would even protect the civilians and even prevent further crimes from happening. Can a gun ban really achieve these promises? No. A gun ban has no significant connection to those promises and as such, a total gun ban should not be implemented. Those activists strongly believe that a gun ban would really reduce the crime rate occurred in the area.

Search and Destroy Essay Example

Their strongest claim was the result that during the electoral gun ban in the Philippines, there was a 70% reduced crime occurrences which were recorded. While one cannot dispute these statistics, it is highly doubtable that these reduced crime rates occurred because of the gun ban. Other factors might have affected it: The increased number of security personnel, the check-points, and the stricter enforcement of the law (Pangolin, 2013). Another issue that these activists wish to pursue is the idea that guns are the main source of weapons for crime.

However, according to Basis(2010), guns only aunt as 10% of the crime rates even in the US, and that, although in a morbid sense of thinking, one could have better chances of getting killed by a club than a gun. This is further supported by Hearer(2012), as she stated, crimes committed through the use of firearms only comprised 10-12% of the whole crimes committed, as compared to other weapons. Still, activists argued that if gun bans are implemented, criminals would lose their weapons of choice.

This is highly debatable as criminals, once they have been deprived of their weapons, would Just think of more ways to achieve their schemes and crimes (Pangolin, 2013). In addition, crimes are not only committed through the use of guns but in other weapons as well such as knives, and that implementing a gun ban would not stop the bloodbath but Just temporarily amend it (Sotto Ill, 2013). In relation to this, people often claim that through a gun ban, crimes would be prevented similar to the first argument, but in reality, a gun ban would Just promote or cause more crime.

A data from the PAN Officials (2012) stated that, Gun Smuggling would inevitably heighten should a gun ban be implemented, Rutherford, Smaller(2013) said that, should gun bans be implemented, gun selling in the black market would be a popular occurrence in criminals. To support this, Cook ; Ludwig(2004) stated that there were no significant connections to the gun bans being able to prevent crime as crimes can still be carried out without the use of firearms. Loch ; Touch(2004) supported this as they stated that crimes are mainly in the individual and not the weapon.

Furthermore, even police officials believe that a gun ban would actually inspire a sense of security and loyalty n the people since they can now fully rely on their officials. This is not entirely true. By implementing a gun ban on the public, the people would Just come to fear the police instead of being loyal to them. Once a police starts harassing you, you don’t fight back because they have a gun, and you don’t (Gagger, 2012). In addition, gun bans would not only cause fear against the authorities, but even denotes a perpetual hierarchy (Barman ; Kahn, 2006).

This is because only those in position can own guns while those who are in the general masses cannot even dare hold one, which can lead to a further clash in social standings, further promoting injustice than justice itself. Lastly, many believe that a gun ban would actually protect civilians and provide more societal safety. Again, this idea is untrue for most aspects. A gun ban would not only violate the constitution of 8294, where citizens are free to acquire guns as a method of self defense, but even Jeopardize the safety of those unarmed civilians (Cook ; Ludwig, 2004).

Because people are now unarmed, criminals can now easily prey on them, whereas, civilians are unable to defend themselves Panamanian, 2013). In addition, implementing a gun ban would be wrong for the legitimate gun owners who are licensed, and should the government provide a refund, it would take a large amount to compensate those owners (Basis, 2010). Furthermore, many would still argue that if authorities are the only ones who could wield firearms, then, they could protect the civilians.

However, this is Just impossible as it would take a large amount of resources to mobile a small force to protect a small place, and it would be implausible that police personnel are guarding a place 2417. Sometimes, even family members would nestle guns in their homes to protect their loved ones because as stated, authorities are not always reliable as they are not always present ( Panamanian, 2013). As long as there is a sense of fear in society, guns will always be an option for self-defense.

To conclude, a total gun ban does not have any significant connection when it comes to reducing crimes, furthermore, it only promotes fear and hierarchies in communities, and can even undermine the safety of the civilians. If people adapt the mentality of banning guns Just because they can cause crimes and murder, then people should Just start banning electricity because they can cause electrocution and death, or even ban fire because they can cause houses to burn down or swimming pools because they can cause people to drown.

In its stead, the government should not ban guns but instead promote more efficient methods of controlling gun usage. As an example, increasing the standards of gun ownership licensing screenings, decreasing the gun caliber to those of only low gun types such as pistols, and imposing stricter laws on illegal gun usage (Linden, 2010). Furthermore, authorities hooked also root the problem to its core which is the smuggling of guns. I hope that in the near future, responsible gun ownership would be enforced because as an FBI agent once said: ‘It is not guns that kill people.

A limited
time offer!
Save Time On Research and Writing. Hire a Professional to Get Your 100% Plagiarism Free Paper