Critical Analysis on the Issue of Gun Control

Critical Analysis on the Issue of Gun Control
The debate on whether gun control works in America started decades ago. Both sides produce reasonable arguments for their perspectives. The recent trend where mass shootings and suicide rates increased pushed the whole country to review regulations formulated for internal security. Gun control appears advantageous when it comes to issues of mass shootings and single suicide cases. Most people assume that the lack of guns will reduce the tendency of gross homicidal events as witnessed in the recent past. Whitney feels that controlling the availability and usability of guns fails to solve the problem (57). The problem is the person, not the guns. A good example is the liberal issuance of guns in Hawaii yet cases of gun shootings are rare. In addition, gun control is a dysfunctional political propaganda which distracts the public from the real issue. The American people together with the government must face the root cause of violent outbursts from selected individuals before reducing the functional tool used. If the presence of some sort of weapon in the house meant violence, then homes of military and police officers would give some indication. Fortunately, these homes are known as among the most peaceful in their selected regions. As such, the problem arises from the emotional state of people rather than the presence of weapons.
On the other hand, Matzopoulos in his article Gun Control Saves lives stated: “Although reduced access does not reduce the root causes of violence, it does, more often than not, reduce the severity and lethality of interpersonal conflict” (1).

Such a statement reaffirms the fact that physical restriction does protect the lives of innocent people. Most people choose these forms of retaliation because they know where to get weapons easily. He states that the reduced availability lowered the rates of gun-related deaths from 67 to 38 per 100,000 from the year 2000 to 2009 in South Africa. Even though there are some demographic differences between this country and America, the statistics are encouraging. More so, they would apply to innocent teenagers dealing with emotional changes as well as pressure to excel in academics. Children and teenagers rely heavily on adults and hence, less likely to search for guns and ammunition if not available in their homes and neighborhoods. Confiscation of weapons could protect the youth from death and possible incarceration.
Unfortunately, gun control measures such as confiscation and strict use of weapons fail to solve the problem of the criminal. In fact, the idea looks like an invitation for criminals. Yes, some changes might occur if America utilizes what Matzopoulos supports but the solution is temporary. Confiscation of weapons creates gun-free zones which leave residents at the mercy of criminals. Interestingly enough, the recent cases of mass shootings occurred in movie cinemas, schools, and other areas where people have no weaponsCITATION Lot13 p 30 l 1033 (Lott 30). The problem stated with men and women using guns to ruin lives, removing guns from the situation creates some sort of unfair advantage. The possible solution for educational institutions would be trained armed officers working there to protect children and the staff. Besides, the strict rules on gun ownership fail to cover the issue of grown adults committing suicide (25). These cases are highly pronounced in the country in comparison to mass shooting or public display of gun aggression. Therefore, the problem still lies with the emotional stability of individuals in America.
Contrariwise, the problem of gun violence affects the economic, social, and political stability of the region as a whole. The power of government allows for all forms of strategies to combat the destructive nature of weapons in America. Finkelman posits that gun control can be more than just confiscation; techniques such as training tests before approval to own a weapon and an increased age limit as requirements from the National Rifles Authority would help (725). Such a move reiterates the notion of gun control as a solution. A second analysis of the strategy also appears to negate gun control. Increasing the qualifications for legal ownership of rifles suggest that the authority recognizes that the gun is not the problem but the person. According to Wilson the assumption that an older person would appreciate the effects of gun violence implies gun control is fallacious as a technique (5). More so, prior training about guns and safety shows that the stakeholders see the problem as human behavior. Gun availability only offers a momentary solution. Moreover, there are black markets where people with unstable mental states can purchase and do as they please. The only solution is creating public awareness in areas susceptible to gun violence.
Psychiatric health for individuals with emotional instabilities caters for the issue of suicides and mass shootings. Childhood issues coupled with increased display of violence fuels incidents with gun violence. The American Psychological Association (APA) published an article which showed compelling evidence that video games had a direct correlation with increased gun violence. The video simulation allowed the youth to experience violence and gun use without the direct indication of consequences. Thus, an unconscious tendency of violence grew due to failure to fully comprehend what guns can do to human life. In so doing, the gun control appears as a viable response to violence in the community. The availability of any form of weapons or violent simulation encourages aggression among young adults. People refer to their formative years to define what is normal or acceptable in life. Thus, if anger resulted in death and suffering as depicted in most video games, they are likely to apply rifles in reality. Gun control where the government reduces the exposure to violence at home protects the lives of the future generation.
Conclusively, proponents of gun control would argue that it protects lives because of the physical implication arising from reduced rifles. Children with minimum exposure to violence and guns are less likely to shoot people. Removal of guns from the streets decreased the possibility of gun-related deaths and possible imprisonment of the youth. All these proposals appear realistic, but they fail to solve the problem of mass shootings and increased suicide rates in the country. Ordinary citizens never wake up one morning and start killing each other or attempting suicide. The event occurs as a consequence of emotional instability. Children with well-grounded morals are less likely to engage in violence whether they watch horrifying videos or not. More so, gun control fails to acknowledge the role of black markets in the phenomenon. The only viable strategy revolves on the person rather than the weapons. The government and other stakeholders should place more emphasis on psychological counseling and morals rather than gun control as a long-term plan.

Works Cited
BIBLIOGRAPHY l 1033 “APA Review Confirms Link Between Playing Violent Video Games and Aggression.” 13 August 2015. American Psychological Association. http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2015/08/violent-video-games.aspx. 18 November 2016.
Finkelman, Paul. Encyclopedia of American Civil Liberties. Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge Publishers, 2013.
Lott, John R. More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws, Third Edition. University of Chicago Press, 2013.
Matzopoulos, Richard. “Gun Control Saves Lives.” January Edition of South African Medical Research Council (2016): 1. www.samj.org.za/index.php/samj/article/viewFile/11034/7384.
Whitney, Craig. Living with Guns: A Liberal’s Case for the Second Amendment. New York: Public Affairs Publishing, 2012.
Wilson, Harry L. Guns, Gun Control, and Elections: The Politics and Policy of Firearms. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2007.