Gun control is a topic that is very relevant to our nation, discussed frequently on the news and is extremely controversial. There are many articles backing up each side of the firearm debate. In "I've Owned Six Guns I've drawn them on Bad Guys I Want to be Understood", Walter Kirn discusses his personal experience of being raised around guns and how that positively influenced his life. Kirn begins with a personal reflection of his first experience with a gun as a young teenager and how this positive experience allowed his family to feel safer in a time of terror. His next point, which reflected on the tragedy of the Colorado movie theatre shooting, discusses the problems of the situation in a unique way compared to most reporters. He states, "But I could still shoot -- with pleasure, without guilt, and with no evident post-traumatic pangs. When the time to lay blame for the massacre arrived, it wasn't Americans' easy access to firearms that I found myself deploring, but a depraved, unbalanced culture of splatter-fest games and other dark entertainments. I blamed the potential for gruesome fame nurtured by the Internet, as well as a mental health system that's not a system" (Kirn). Kirn, working as a journalist at the time, offers up many other possible causes of these mass shootings and unlike most reporters, he takes away a lot of the negatively that arises in the presence of a shooting. Kirn pins the blame on the individual, or as society as a whole, as opposed to the firearm itself.  

I really became intrigued to research gun control when I came here from Boston, a city that holds a much different view on guns than the state of South Carolina does. I was accustomed to hearing most of my information through the media, which constantly showed tragedies. These tragedies and the way that they were portrayed through the news made firearms look like the issue. My personal opinion on guns has changed significantly since I began my research. At first I just wanted to become more aware of a topic that is so relevant to our nation and since has become more and more apparent to me since I have lived down south. Looking back, I almost feel that my initial view on national gun control, caused by my lack of personal experience with firearms, was directly based on the stories I was hearing through the media. I would watch reports on these shootings as they occurred weekly and being so naive on the subject, I would look at the simple solution to this problem: Get rid of guns. Next thing I know I was living across the east coast in South Carolina, listening to my in state friends display their broad knowledge of firearms through their personal collections. Hearing about my friend's hunting experiences as well as a little bit of research were all it took for me to initially question and later completely adjust the argument I wanted to make regarding gun control in my home of Carolina. In the past few months I have been able to feel the power that comes with firing off a rifle for the first time, I have learned the firearm laws of South Carolina and compared them to my hometown and I have heard from many people, much more experienced than I, their personal opinions and encounters with firearms. All of this recent exposure to firearms uncovered that it is necessary to look past the killer and analyze the other factors involved in a tragedy. I truly believe that citizens of South Carolina, through proper background checks, should be allowed to purchase guns legally. The ability to bear firearms is a basic constitutional right and the majority of guns owned legally are used for safety and self-defense, as opposed to violence as portrayed by the media.

Gun laws vary from state to state. The firearm regulations in South Carolina prove to be significantly looser than what I was familiar with at home. This piece of legislation showed that all it takes for a gun license is a background check and application, that many types of handguns can be concealed in public places and that South Carolina allows certified citizens to purchase these firearms in other states. (South Carolina Law Enforcement Division both sides of this controversial topic). It defends gun control by showing how simple the process of obtaining a firearm is in this state, but supports gun control by placing restrictions on the buyer and the type of gun that can be purchased. The article also introduces concealed weapon laws and emphasizes how guns can be used positively for self-defense and to help confidence. The positive impacts of guns is usually overshadowed by the negativity of bad situations, which makes it hard for people to see both sides of the gun control debate.

When looking at gun availability in comparison to homicides, it is easy to notice that there is a ton of debate over the topic. This debate is caused because the topic is composed of so many unique factors that it becomes difficult to provide clear-cut statistics. There is an advantage on both ends of the argument being that increasing gun availability could result in an increased homicide rate, while at the same time it could help many citizens feel more safe and own firearms to use for self-defense (Wodarz). The main reason that the statistics vary significantly among sources is that there are so many components that go into these studies and every study is composed using different factors. For example, when you are looking into the relationship between gun availability and homicide rate, you need to account for several other factors. You need to be aware that not all homicides that occur are done so with legal guns, and not all legal guns are still in the hands of their licensed owners. You also need to take into account that someone could use a legal gun to kill a shooter and prevent an attack, and that would still be considered a homicide in the statistics (Stolzenberg). In short, these statistics can be very effective to research and the understanding of gun control, but they are not clear-cut enough to prove either side of this argument.

One article from the New York Times regarding opposition to gun control did the best job of providing these studies to back up firearms because the author, Sarah Steverman, provides facts that directly back up the anti-gun control argument through such a credible source. As long as the audience is aware that there are other factors involved and the author is biased, this source can be essential for providing factual evidence to the argument. This article provides key evidence such as, "The number of guns in America has increased by more than 50 percent since 1993, and in that same period the gun homicide rate in the United States has dropped by half" and "the most rigorous analysis suggests that all these gun permits caused neither a drop in crime, nor a spike in killings." This article also encourages the idea that firearms should be allowed through detailed background by stating, "New Harvard research confirms a long-ago finding that 40 percent of firearms in the United States are acquired without a background check. Why empower criminals to arm themselves" (Kristof). That emphasizes how many guns are floating around in the hands of the wrong people and that this group of people alone is causing a large percentage of our country's gun violence.  Many people's opinions on gun control are formed by strictly the details that they hear through the media. While current news is very important, news reports are often biased and tragedies such as shootings are always looked at negatively, which makes certain people associate firearms with an adverse perspective. These cases are made up of so much more than just a shooter, a weapon and a group of victims. You have to look at the background behind the story. You need to look at how and why the shooter obtained the gun and if the shooter is in the mental state to be making their own decisions. Lastly, you must investigate whether the man behind the gun is even allowed to carry a firearm legally (Steverman). Even with strong background check and restrictions, the majority of tragedies in the news would still occur because the killers often obtain the weapons illegally and there are so many firearms currently carried around South Carolina that shutting down gun stores would just open up room for underground gun purchases and more theft.

An important thought to keep in mind when looking at firearm statistics and violence is that the type of gun is very important, and that is not always reflected in all statistics. Most of the shootings that take the most victims are executed with automatic weapons that are not legal in our country. Many other people own illegal guns and end up using them for violence as well. The selection of firearms that can be legally purchased through detailed background checks is composed of many different rifles. In a recent study done for homicides in 2012, rifles only accounted for 3.6% of homicides, and that is without knowing if the rifle was even registered to that shooter on not (Lindgren). Rifles are commonly used for hunting and would not be an effective weapon to use for shootings due to the smaller bullet capacity and the time it takes in between shots. With that being said, it would still be an effective weapon to have in a time of self-defense because it would allow you to at least fire off one shot in a timely manner. Although firearms can often be used safely, automatic weapons or any other overpowered weaponry are rarely used positively.

A big concern when discussing gun control is the policies carried within the second amendment. Many people feel that their rights as United States citizens would be violated if they were not allowed to purchase firearms. Our country was built on these core ideals from the Constitution and a lot of controversy among our own nation could occur if these ideals are altered. The main argument that opposes this point is that the Constitution was written during a time when our nation was very different and the policies of the second amendment are outdated now with all the advancements that have come to guns and weapons (Barrett). Even though times have changed and firearms have become significantly more powerful, the words of the second amendment will always remain sacred and important to our nation. Personally, I know many people who would be angered by a change to an amendment that is so historical to American culture and this debate could spark a lot of protests, riots and violence, the last things our country needs right now.

Guns are weapons and they can be used very negatively if they end up in the wrong hands. Guns are powerful and can cause violence and even a person with a clean record could have criminal intentions. While guns can be used for self-defense, it is rare that a bystander with a concealed and legal firearm is in the right time and place to prevent a tragedy. While these are strong points, these counterarguments are outweighed tenfold by the arguments presented to keep firearm sales legal (Lindeen). Although guns can be used negatively, most people that use them for violence did not get their weapon from a gun store. With the amount of weapons already floating around our nation, a ban on gun sales would not change these criminals' abilities to obtain a weapon. The people with a clean record and violent intentions are all people with either mental illnesses or corrupted minds and are not a good representation of the type of people that legally purchase firearms. They make up such a small percent of firearm purchasers, but draw all the attention because they are the ones who make the headlines through tragedy. Lastly, even though it is rare that a bystander would have a firearm on their person at the right time and place to stop an incident, there are many current stories of times where this does occur. In all of those cases, the person who prevented the criminal from killing was wielding a legal weapon. The majority of shooters use illegal weapons or weapons that they obtained illegally, which makes a ban on firearms once again unhelpful to the situation.

Just like technology, firearms are continuing to improve and become more powerful. Gun control has stirred up quite the debate in our country and with the spotlight shining bad light on shooters; it is hard to see both sides of the argument first hand. Continuing to sell certain firearms legally, only to those that are approved to purchase them through a detailed background check, is the best step for our nation. Stricter background checks and closer watch of private gun sales could help our nation to make sure that these weapons always end up in the right hands and timely checkups could ensure that they stay there (Sen). Continuing the sale of firearms would allow our country to carry on the ideals of the prestigious Constitution as the technology around us continues to advance. There is no telling what is in store for the future of firearms, but I think that banning them and not finding out would be a huge mistake. Guns bring a lot of power to individuals and as long as the individuals that carry these firearms are responsible and well minded, only positive things can come from the sale of firearms. The next challenge our country faces is creating a precise way of making sure guns only end up in the hands that they should.

