gun control8, Miscellaneous, College Term Papers.com


		Data Bases
		• Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism?

		Links
		• Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com

		Free Essays
		• Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • My Term Papers • Get Free Essays • Essay World • Planet Papers

Search Lots of Essays

Back to Subjects - Miscellaneous

gun control8

gun control8 The Clinton Administration has been four square pro gun control. Indeed, he has declared his support for a major crime bill based on the premise that “the first duty of any government is to try to keep its citizens safe, but clearly too many Americans are not safe today.” Clinton’s plan was formally introduced in 1993, after Congress had reconvened after its summer recess. Clinton’s proposal calls for spending $3.4 billion dollars for50,000 new police officers, a “major down payment,” according to Clinton, on his campaign promise for 100,000 new cops. A centerpiece of the plan is the Brady Bill, which (at that time mandated a five working day waiting period for gun purchases). Other provisions would send young offenders to military style boot camps instead of prison. Clinton would limit the ability of those convicted of capital crimes to file “Habeas Corpus” appeals endlessly through the Federal Courts, and at the same time, expand to 47thenumber of crimes subject to the death penalty. Clinton also moved by Executive Order to ban the import of assault pistols like the Israeli made Uzi and tighten up the licensing rules for gun dealers to make it harder for people to run gun shops out of hotel rooms or the trunks of their cars. Under his new rules, anyone applying for a permit to sell weapons will be fingerprinted and subject to a background check. After a summer of fighting partisan attempts to label him a “tax and spend liberal,” Clinton’s sprawling crime package should provide some much needed political relief. In order to pass his legislation, he had to hold together a fragile alliance of liberals and conservatives. George Bush sponsored a package that was similar in many ways to Clinton’s, only to see it die in the Senate. In order to forestall such failure, Clinton’s bill depended largely on a clever bit of horse-trading. The idea was that liberals, eager to appear hard-nosed, would accept the death penalty and the limitations on habeas corpus appeals in order to get the gun control they so ardently desire, while conservatives, eager to appear constructed, would make the reverse trade. Far more significant would be a decision to ban the domestic production of semi-automatics, a move that Clinton supports in principle but that might be political impossible. Though weakened by recent defeats over gun control measures in New Jersey and Virginia, the National Rifle Association would muster all of its forces to prevent sanction infringement. Attorney General Janet Reno, however, expressed confidence that stricter gun control is possible stating, “The NRA doesn’t particularly care for me, but it is important for the NRA to understand what this stuff has done to America. I just think the American people are sick and fed up with what assault weapons have done. I can remember the first time I saw an assault weapon. It is deadly. It is a horrible thing. The American people have come to realize what these weapons are doing on our streets. They are saying, enough, is enough, is enough.” (Gibbs, 1993) Since the Clinton Administration embarked on positions of gun control, we have seen much support rally around him. Many Americans believe that gun control should be improved and the regulations made more stringent. However, the National Rifle Association (NRA) has a most formidable lobby, and lobbing campaign, which up until this time, has presented past Presidents from initiation gun control laws. There appears to be an almost grass roots movement to stifle efforts which attempt to establish more effective gun control laws. To a large extent, it is our Constitution which gives us the right to bear arms, and with which who oppose gun control rely most easily upon. However, when someone is shot in New York City, or any other major metropolis for that matter, the average cost that person incurs in medical treatment in $9,646. The figure does not include ambulance costs, follow-up care, medication, or rehabilitation. It also escalates if intensive care is required, reaching as much as $150,000 per patient. The financial burden for the injury moreover, is borne by the public. A study at a San Francisco Hospital noted that 86% of the expenses incurred by firearm injuries are paid out of taxes. Guns and violence have, therefore, become a part of the nation’s debate over health care costs. The President cited guns as a reason for rising medical bills in his address to Congress two weeks ago, and Hillary Rodham Clinton endorse Senator Bill Bradley’s call for a 25% sales tax on “the purveyors of violence.” The levee would go towards funding health care. The cost of treating firearm injuries in the U.S. exceeds $4 billion dollars a year, according to congressional and gun control group estimates. One of the spinal cord injuries in Detroit found that 40% percent resulted from gunshots. According to New York Congressman Major Owens: “We cannot expect to rein-in the costs of our health care system if emergency rooms are overflowing with victims of gun violence.” While the 500 plus members of the Clinton health care task force considered everything from defining who is a part-time worker to estimating the number of jobs lost because of reform, little attention was paid to violence. That may soon change. Dr. David Satcher, Clinton’s newly appointed director who is a part-time worker to estimating the number of jobs lost because of reform, little attention was paid to violence. (Thompson, 1993) Indeed, there are extremely high, as well as escalating costs relating to victims of gunfire. Many of these are attributed to domestic violence, and far too many are related to accidents. Members of the family cause many of these accidents, particularly children, who fool around with the ‘house-gun,’ and as result murder someone else, themselves, or commit serious injuries. A strong argument can and is made for further controls on the prevailing sales of guns. There are some miscellaneous facts and statistics regarding guns and gun control, according to the FBI Uniform Crime Report, the percentage of violent crimes Committed with a fire arm dropped in 1994 - - the same year that the Brady Law went into effect. This decline ended the steady increase in gun violence from 1985 to 1993. The firearm crime rate has continued to drop each year since the Brady Law. Most developed nations have crime rates equivalent to the U.S. but America’s rate of lethal and life threatening violence from assaults is 4 – 18 time greater due to the more frequent use of guns in crimes. The United States has the least restricted access to fire arms of any democracy in the world, and consequently, the U.S. also has the highest fire arm murder rate of any democracy in the world. America has up to 1,000 times as many hand gun deaths per year as other developed countries such as the United Kingdom, or Australia. During the Vietnam War, 58,000 American soldiers, Marines, Sailors and Airmen were killed. During that same time, firearms killed more than 70,000 people in the United States - -most handguns. Although gun manufacturers are trying to convince women that they need to buy a gun to protect themselves from random crime, the greatest threat to a woman comes from the people and guns within her own home. According to a study in the New England Journal of Medicine, a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to be used in to kill a family member or friend, than to kill an intruder. Guns are the only consumer product that is not subject to regulation by the Consumer Product Safety Commission. There are no basic safety requirements imposed on the manufacturer of handguns. The design, manufacture and sale of vacuum cleaners is more thoroughly regulated than that of fire arms. The Center for Disease Control estimates that nearly 1.2 million latchkey children have access to loaded and unloaded firearms. Approximately ten thousand times a year, a young person shoots someone unintentionally 18 years old or younger. In 710 instances, the person dies. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms estimates that handguns are involved in 71% of all armed crimes and 60% of all suicides. “The U.S. is already the toughest of the advanced industrial societies on crime and criminals. We lock up a larger fraction of our population for longer periods of time than any other advanced western nation. Yet we have overwhelming the largest crime rate.” Professor James Wright, Sociologist at Tulane University who is often quoted by the gun lobby. Citizens’ Self Defense Act is gaining support while many republican leaders still refuse to hold hearings. In my opinion, I should like to proffer a case study, which I believe brings much of the rhetoric, laws etc., home, especially when we realize there are individual’s lives at stake. I also would state that the framers of the Constitution would be appalled to hear that every American does not have the right to own a gun of some kind. Fifty-four year old John Quillen Hammiel of Temple Hills, Maryland, was attacked by two would-be muggers recently just outside his apartment. Hammiel believed the two assailants were armed (one was carrying what turned out to be a realistic looking toy gun) but he refused to play the part of the helpless victim. Hammiel drew his sidearm and shot and killed one of the attackers. Obviously acting in self-defense, Hammiel was not charged with murder or assault. He was, however, charged for the “illegal” act of carrying a concealed firearm. This man, who successfully defended himself against lawless thugs, now has to defend himself in the court system. The Citizen’s Self Defense Act, sponsored by Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md) would help to protect persons like Mr. Himmeil by given a recourse in court if they are wronged by anti-gun and perhaps politically motivated prosecutors. Rep. Bartlett’s Bill H.R. 27, which currently has 57 co-sponsors, is bottled up in the Crime Sub-Committee, chaired by Rep. Bill McCollum (R Sl). While the Sub-Committee has held hearings on several anti-gun proposals, it has been reluctant to move forward any substantially pro gun legislation. Every year, many honest citizens find themselves in the clutches of anti-gun criminal justice system. For example, Bernard Goetz, who successfully defended himself against several youths who approached him with sharpened screwdrivers, was acquitted of all assault charges. Nevertheless, Goetz spent eight months in prison for violating a New York City handgun ordinance. H.R. 27 operates on the principle that that a citizen cannot be imprisoned for the legitimate exercise of a constitutionally protected right. It would serve as a safeguard anti-gun prosecutors and ill informed juries, as in the Goetz case. ( Citizen’s Defense Act gaining support, 1997) To me, outlawing guns is ridiculous. It is my view that everyone should be allowed to own a gun, except, in reasonable cases, those violent criminals who have proved that they are not worthy of such. I am speaking about the everyday citizen. Criminals by definition are not impacted by anti-gun laws. Whether or not they legal has no meaning to the person who would bang you over the head with a bat, or shoot you just as soon as look at you, for the ring on your finger. The large, well-funded American Civil Liberties group has taken its show on the road. Contenting that freedom is an international issue that is under assault all around the world, this group has taken on a active role in lobbying the UN and supporting foreign sister organizations. You can imagine the reaction of U.S. editorialists. That’s right, they are outraged. What? That Americans are taking an active interest in freedom beyond the national borders? Well, yes, you see, the Civil Liberties group is the National Rifle Association and it is giving aid and comfort to gun rights activists around the world. But respectable commentators like Tree Huggers who confine their efforts to cute animals and pretty plants shy away from nasty, unpopular rights. And, if there is one freedom that sticks in the graw of pundits who wear civil libertarian credentials like oh-so-trendy designer sunglasses, it is the right to keep and bear arms. The criticism of the NRA’s actions is a litany of people who miss the point. Other countries don’t have a Second Amendment. How dare Americans tell them that they have a right to bear arms! Other countries don’t have a First Amendment protecting free speech, either, or Eight Amendment barring cruel and unusual punishment, yet still we protest when foreign brown shirts round up political dissidents and hand them upside down over a steaming latrine. How presumptuous of us. The truth is Americans don’t protect personal rights because they were codified in the Bill of Rights and now we are stuck with them, we enumerated those rights in the Bill of Rights to give them extra protection. This country was founded on the principle that liberty is a natural right and that no government can ever take it away. (Tuccille, 1997) From my own experience, I have had the unfortunate experience of being in a situation where things got out of hand, and violence ensured. Fortunately, this has not happened very much and there was always a resolution. Who is to say, however, that if I was carrying a handgun, or the other individual was, that in the heat of temper one of us many not have shot the other. In retrospect, it was rather a foolish argument, and it was not worthy of resorting to taking the life of another. Unfortunately, and all too often we hear of this happening. Many children will kill themselves or others as pointed out by the statistics I have identified in this thesis. In my opinion, gun control has gotten out of control and it is high time that the citizens of this country, as well as our political leaders braved up to the American Rifle Association and passed some real legislation that would keep the guns out of the hands of criminals. Bibliography:

Word Count: 2342