Archuleta 1

Morehead High School

Poor Gun Control, The Real Killer
Brandon Archuleta
English IV Honors
Ms. Castle
21 November 2016

Archuleta 2

Poor gun control, The Real Killer

Thesis: Even though the Second Amendment gives all citizens the right to bear arms, the
right should be limited by criminal activity, mental disability, and information from all state
records.
I.

Tighter Forms of Background checks

A. Mentally ill should not be allowed to purchase or possess weapons
1. Mentally ill man purchased a weapon legally when he should have
been listed as danger to himself and society. Could have been
prevented with stricter gun control
2. The loose background checks are resulting in mentally ill people to
legally purchase guns which is putting them and others in danger
B. Suicides with guns because of depression
1. More than half of america's fatalities are from suicide which is a
result of a mental illness known as depression
2. Strict background checks could possibly find red flags for people
with mental illnesses and could possibly prevent some of the many
suicides that happen each year

II.

The dangers of loose gun rights towards our citizens

A. Loose gun control and school shootings

Archuleta 3

1. Because of loose gun control the sandy hook shooter was able to
purchase a gun with very loose background checks
2. The Sandy Hook shooter would have never committed the murder
hadn't it been for loose gun control because the background checks
never weren't fluent enough to find that the man was mentally ill
B. Gun control could possibly be upping rate of crimes committed with guns
1. People have said that because of gun control people are being
tempted more to want to have them which in turn may be resulting
in them breaking the law by owning illegal guns
2. Anti gun control activists are promoting violence if need to keep
from following gun control laws
III.

The 2nd Amendment and its flaws

A. 2nd Amendment meaning
1. Court concludes that 2nd amendment does not protect your right to
bear arms because it was originally adopted to arm militias
2. This totally contradicted the 5th circuit which stated that the
constitution does protect citizens and their right to bear arms
B. 2nd Amendment theories
1. People tried to get the 2nd amendment changed because of the
theory that the 2nd amendment could be talking about the militia
or the people

Archuleta 4

2. The court stated that the theory could not be proven or shot down
because people actually really don't know
3. Stated that gun rights protected our militia from gun control which
in turn would make it to where we could not confiscate guns from
our citizens making it unsafe for people
C. 2nd amendment misunderstandings
1. Most people believe that the 2nd amendment was originally made
to conserve gun rights for citizens when in reality it was really to
keep the militia armed at all times
2. The 2nd amendment is believed to be a law to protect us when in
reality it hurts us very much because of the possible people that
could purchase/obtain weapons
D. 2nd Amendment Restrictions
1. Some anti gun rights activists want restrictions on the 2nd
amendment but studies show that if gun control was as strict as
they want more than 99% of citizens would not be eligible to own
or purchase a gun
2. Studies have shown that restrictions on guns and stricter laws that
pro gun rights activists have suggested would up the amount of
crime increasingly

Archuleta 5

Brandon Archuleta
Ms. Castle
English IV Honors
11/04/16
Poor Gun Control, The Real Killer
Gun rights, the menace of society, the cause of many of mass killings in America today.
The looseness of gun control has been the reason of many of school shootings and public
massacres that have occurred over the past couple of years in America. Strict gun control is
important because it will make society safer as a whole and will reduce the amount of shootings
that occur anywhere in America. Strict gun control will not only protect us but allow us to lower
crime rate in America and keep criminals out of potential situations where they could commit
any crime with a firearm. Although these may be good reasons, many Americans still believe
that the loose gun rights that are in control today are protecting them more than the strict gun
rights laws. Some Americans believe that they have the right to guns because of the second
amendment which actually doesn't protect their own right to bear arms. Even though the second
amendment gives all citizens the right to bear arms, that right should be limited by criminal
activity, mental disability, information from all state records. This paper will first and foremost
go over the idea of tighter background checks so that trustworthy citizens will be able to
purchase and properly own guns whereas criminals and people with possible mental disabilities
will not be able to purchase any firearms that they could potentially hurt anyone with. Secondly
it will go over the dangers of loose gun rights towards citizens, the looseness of gun control has
been the cause of many tragedies in America today, for example the Sandy Hook shootings, the

Archuleta 6

2012 Aurora movie theatre shooting, and any other school/public shootings that have occurred
over the past couple of years. Lastly, it will cover the major argument of the 2nd amendment and
its meanings, but this paper will state facts as to why the 2nd Amendment doesn't actually protect
the citizens right to bear arms but actually protects militias and their rights to bear arms.
Americas background checks today are loosely enforced and need to be put into action
like they should and were meant to be. Since the background checks are not thorough enough
already, many of the mass shootings today are committed by those that are mentally ill. Two
great examples of this would be the Sandy Hook school shooting which was committed by Adam
Lanza, a person who suffered from an illness and had a violent past. If theses strict background
checks would have been enforced Adam may have never been able to purchase the firearm and
the shooting may have been prevented. The other example would be the 2012 Aurora shooting
which was committed by James E. Holmes, yet another man with a mental illness that purchased
his firearms legally. Both of these tragedies may have been prevented if strict gun control was in
action but many future tragedies may be prevented if strict gun control is put into action.
The next thing that should be acknowledged is the Amount of suicides by people that are
depressed, which is a mental illness, that are committed with guns. This can also fall under the
category of stricter gun control because with it, the mentally ill would not be able to purchase
weapons For example a man that had a history with violence and had a mental disorder but was
still allowed to purchase a gun legally, but if stricter gun control has been put into action he
would have never been able to purchase the gun because he would have been considered a
Danger to himself and society and would have never been allowed to purchase the gun in the
first place. These people with depression or other mental illnesses may be able to be noticed for

Archuleta 7

red flags if stricter gun control is enforced and this will likely reduce the amount of suicides
committed with guns per year. Over 11 states thus far have strengthened their laws on gun rights
to better protect their citizens in hopes that other states will follow behind them. (Khimm) This
leads on to the conclusion that not having strict background checks isn't really logical because
having them brings nothing but better outcomes for citizens, stricter background checks will
make society safer as a whole.
The next major problem that will be discussed is the danger of loose gun rights towards
citizens. School shootings have been one of the major menaces to society because of how many
there have been these last couple of years, there have been as much as 142 school shootings with
major fatalities since the Sandy Hook shooting. It was said by a man in the article A family
tragedy calls for unfamiliar solutions that school shootings have sadly become a tragic ritual in
society today (Sanburn). This leads back to the argument of stricter background checks because
if they were in action most of the mentally ill people that commit these crimes would not be able
to get their hands on a gun in the first place, Marco Mignone stated that after the Virginia tech
shooting about 8 years ago all gun dealers were sent new forms and the filler of the form would
have to check a box that stated if they had ever been admitted into a mental institution or been
diagnosed with a mental issue and if they checked yes you said no to selling them a gun
(Mignone. The looseness on gun control is upping rates of crime increasingly, even the little
amount the government enforce, well with gun activists promoting violence and their followers
following behind in their footsteps the mentality is to do whatever it takes to maintain whatever
guns you have. Even the little gun control that is in action now isn't being enforced properly,
people are still allowed to go to gun shows and buy guns without any sort of background checks,

Archuleta 8

in a recent presidential candidate interview Hillary Clinton said I will crush all the loopholes to
gun buying including gun buys at gun shows. (Sanburn) America is slowly but surely taking
baby steps towards making it safe for citizens, President Barack Obama recently started putting
armed and trained police officers in public schools to possibly prevent any further tragedies that
may happen.
But the question is, Are loose gun rights really putting us in danger? A quote from Mr. Zimring,
Gun control or not, people will find a way to kill someone if they choose to. (721) Studies
show that the confiscation of guns will only make cut homicide sharply. Arguments that have
been stated ensure that guns are merely a speck on the stain that is crime, if you are going to
outlaw guns why not outlaw everything else that is plausible to hurt or injure someone. Where
will the protection be? On average it takes a minimum of 10 minutes for police officers to get to
the crime scene, so what happens when in that 10 minutes you are shot? All because you didn't
have a firearm to protect you. Another main thing is that these laws dont apply to criminals, if
they want guns they will find ways to get them whether they are breaking the law or not, and
what about the 18th amendment that was supposed to ban any use of alcohol? Did that work?
No, it just increased Americas crime rate by a huge amount. Another main argument that anti
gun right believers state is that crime rates in England and Japan are exceptionally lower than
Americas gun crime that continues to soar, but this can't actually be proven considering the
difference in countries and the atmosphere differences in each country. Studies show that
everyday over 400,000 life-threatening crimes are prevented by the presence of a firearm, studies
also show that over 90% of all violent crimes in America are not firearm associated.

Archuleta 9

So are strict gun laws really worth it? The answer is yes. The reason being that the
eighteenth amendment did not flourish because of the lack of effort to enforce the laws. Do strict
gun laws actually work? Yes, plus they won't actually affect law abiding citizens, it will improve
safety and citizens will be safer overall. Statistics show that over 60% of felons found guilty
prevented robbing houses that had gun owners living in them, so not only will strict gun laws
prevent criminals from
being able to acquire guns but they will also make it easier for law abiding citizens to obtain
firearms to further protect themselves. The argument that 90% of Americas life threatening
crimes are no gun related may be a good argument but 10% of Americas people is still 31.89
million people, strict gun laws could prevent many of those crimes by keeping firearms away
from dangerous people.
The last and final argument that is arguably the most important is the 2nd amendment and
its flaws. The 2nd amendment has had many theories of its meaning, one of them being that the
second amendment only protects the militias right to bear arms which was what the amendment
was originally meant to protect. Most people make the false accusation that the 2nd amendment
was always meant to protect their gun rights which is also false. The 2nd Amendment actually
states that A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of
the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. implying that those who were allowed
to bear arms did so as members of a properly controlled militia. So in reality since we have a
well rounded, powerful military because of the signing of the bill of rights so we don't need a
militia anymore so then that would mean that the right to bear arms would be completely
revoked. This is just one of the many flaws of the 2nd amendment, think about what the 2nd

Archuleta 10

amendment is allowing right now, it is allowing criminals and all sorts of undeserving people the
right to bear arms which is in turn putting everyone as a society in danger, the sandy hook
shooting being one of these dangerous occurrences that have happened over the years. The
people of the past have tried putting restrictions on this amendment but they have all failed, with
people stating that they would be giving up their rights and surrendering their source of
protection when in reality all reformers seek to do is put restrictions on guns to further improve
the safety of society and make sure that guns do not fall in the hands of criminals and mentally ill
people. In the end putting restrictions of the 2nd Amendment would do nothing but good for
society, now the question of will it prevent more tragedies like the Sandy Hook and Newton
school shootings? it can not be fully proved, but by putting restrictions on these laws and
keeping firearms out of the hand of dangerous human beings it can definitely reduce the chances
of another massacre occurring.
So in conclusion, Strict gun rights would do nothing but improve society and make
country safer as a whole. Tighter forms of background checks would make it to where the
mentally ill would not be able to purchase guns and it would make it increasingly harder if not
impossible for criminals to legally purchase guns. These tighter forms of background checks
could lower the chances of another public massacre, especially in schools, and will lower crime
rate substantially. Depression suicides would lower because of the fact that it is considered a
mental illness and the depressed individual would not be able to purchase a firearm. The dangers
of loose gun rights towards citizens, although they may feel are protecting them, are actually
making it even more unsafe than they would be with strict gun rights, because with these loose
gun rights criminals are allowed to legally purchase guns that they more than likely will use in

Archuleta 11

dangerous ways. If America would just tighten the laws a little it would be possible to make it to
where criminal would not be able to purchase guns and law abiding citizens would still be able to
purchase their guns. The looseness of gun rights towards citizens only make it easier for crime to
be committed, these problems need to be acknowledged and solved, especially the purchasing of
guns and how easy it is for a man to go to a gun show, find a gun that he likes, and purchase it on
the spot with absolutely no background checks or any looking into that person's history to make
sure they aren't criminals. The 2nd Amendment needs to have some light shined upon it because
Americas citizens are clueless to the meaning of it, it was ratified to protect militias right to own
guns, but militias are not even around anymore due to the fact that the Army is so powerful. The
guns that being put into citizens hands need to be put into trained military forces hands so that
they can do what they are made to do, protect us. If gun rights aren't stricened anytime soon, with
the way America is going right now, it is going to destroy country because of all the calamities it
has caused the people, gun rights are causing major problems in society and all we are doing is
standing by and watching it crumble.

Archuleta 12

Frank Zimring. "Is Gun Control Likely to Reduce Violent Killings?" Jstor.org. University of
Chicago
Law Review, n.d. Web.
HOAR, WILLIAM P. "Troops Denied Right To Carry; Seniors, Vets Targeted By Federal Gun
Grab."
New American (08856540) 31.16 (2015): 41. MAS Complete. Web. 23 Oct. 2015.

Archuleta 13

KHIMM, SUZY. "In TragedyS Wake." New Republic 246.12 (2015): 13. MAS Complete. Web.
5
Nov. 2015.
Lott, John R. "More Guns Less Crime." Books.google.com. N.p., n.d. Web.
Sanburn, Josh, et al. "A Familiar Tragedy Calls For Unfamiliar Solutions." Time 186.15 (2015):
11.
Middle Search Plus. Web. 16 Oct. 2015.
Utter, Glenn H. Eric.ed.gov. The Oryx Press, n.d. Web.
ZORNICK, GEORGE. "Gun Control After Newtown." Nation 299.14 (2014): 22. MAS
Complete.
Web. 20 Oct. 2015.
Mignone, Marco. Personal Interview. 20 November 2016.

Archuleta 14