gun laws essay

Gun Control Essay: Important Topics, Examples, and More

Gun Control Definition

Gun control refers to the regulation of firearms to reduce the risk of harm caused by their misuse. It is an important issue that has garnered much attention in recent years due to the increasing number of gun-related incidents, including mass shootings and homicides. Writing an essay about gun control is important because it allows one to explore the various aspects of this complex and controversial topic, including the impact of gun laws on public safety, the constitutional implications of gun control, and the social and cultural factors that contribute to gun violence.

In writing an essay on gun control, conducting thorough research, considering multiple perspectives, and developing a well-informed argument is important. This may involve analyzing existing gun control policies and their effectiveness, exploring the attitudes and beliefs of different groups towards firearms, and examining the historical and cultural context of gun ownership and use. Through this process, one can develop a nuanced understanding of the issue and propose effective solutions to address the problem of gun violence.

Further information on writing essays on gun control can be found in various sources, including academic journals, policy reports, and news articles. In the following paragraphs, our nursing essay writing services will provide tips and resources to help you write an effective and informative guns essay. Contact our custom writer and get your writing request satisfied in a short term.

Gun Control Essay Types

There are various types of essays about gun control, each with its own unique focus and approach. From analyzing the effectiveness of existing gun laws to exploring the cultural and historical context of firearms in society, the possibilities for exploring this topic are virtually endless.

Let's look at the following types and examples from our essay writing service USA :

• Argumentative Essay : This essay clearly argues for or against gun control laws. The writer must use evidence to support their position and refute opposing arguments.
• Descriptive Essay: A descriptive essay on gun control aims to provide a detailed topic analysis. The writer must describe the history and evolution of gun laws, the different types of firearms, and their impact on society.
• Cause and Effect Essay: This type of essay focuses on why gun control laws are necessary, the impact of gun violence on society, and the consequences of not having strict gun control laws.
• Compare and Contrast Essay: In this type of essay, the writer compares and contrasts different countries' gun laws and their effectiveness. They can also compare and contrast different types of guns and their impact on society.
• Expository Essay: This type of essay focuses on presenting facts and data on the topic of gun control. The writer must explain the different types of gun laws, their implementation, and their impact on society.
• Persuasive Essay: The writer of a persuasive essay aims to persuade the reader to support their position on gun control. They use a combination of facts, opinions, and emotional appeals to convince the reader.
• Narrative Essay: A narrative essay on gun control tells a story about an individual's experience with gun violence. It can be a personal story or a fictional one, but it should provide insight into the human impact of gun violence.

In the following paragraphs, we will provide an overview of the most common types of gun control essays and some tips and resources to help you write them effectively. Whether you are a student, a researcher, or simply someone interested in learning more about this important issue, these essays can provide valuable insight and perspective on the complex and often controversial topic of gun control.

Persuasive Essay on Gun Control

A persuasive essay on gun control is designed to convince the reader to support a specific stance on gun control policies. To write an effective persuasive essay, the writer must use a combination of facts, statistics, and emotional appeals to sway the reader's opinion. Here are some tips from our expert custom writer to help you write a persuasive essay on gun control:

• Research : Conduct thorough research on gun control policies, including their history, effectiveness, and societal impact. Use credible sources to back up your argument.
• Develop a thesis statement: In your gun control essay introduction, the thesis statement should clearly state your position on gun control and provide a roadmap for your paper.
• Use emotional appeals: Use emotional appeals to connect with your reader. For example, you could describe the impact of gun violence on families and communities.
• Address opposing viewpoints: Address opposing viewpoints and provide counterarguments to strengthen your position.
• Use statistics: Use statistics to back up your argument. For example, you could use statistics to show the correlation between gun control laws and reduced gun violence.
• Use rhetorical devices: Use rhetorical devices, such as metaphors and analogies, to help the reader understand complex concepts.

Persuasive gun control essay examples include:

• The Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual's right to own any firearm.
• Stricter gun control laws are necessary to reduce gun violence in the United States.
• The proliferation of guns in society leads to more violence and higher crime rates.
• Gun control laws should be designed to protect public safety while respecting individual rights.

Argumentative Essay on Gun Control

A gun control argumentative essay is designed to present a clear argument for or against gun control policies. To write an effective argumentative essay, the writer must present a well-supported argument and refute opposing arguments. Here are some tips to help you write an argumentative essay on gun control:

• Choose a clear stance: Choose a clear stance on gun control policies and develop a thesis statement that reflects your position.
• Research : Conduct extensive research on gun control policies and use credible sources to back up your argument.
• Refute opposing arguments: Anticipate opposing arguments and provide counterarguments to strengthen your position.
• Use evidence: Use evidence to back up your argument. For example, you could use data to show the correlation between gun control laws and reduced gun violence.
• Use logical reasoning: Use logical reasoning to explain why your argument is valid.

Examples of argumentative essay topics on gun control include:

• Gun control laws infringe upon individuals' right to bear arms and protect themselves.
• Gun control laws are ineffective and do not prevent gun violence.

If you'd rather have a professional write you a flawless paper, you can always contact us and buy argumentative essay .

Do You Want to Ease Your Academic Burden?

Order a rhetorical analysis essay from our expert writers today and experience the power of top-notch academic writing.

How to Choose a Good Gun Control Topic: Tips and Examples

Choosing a good gun control topic can be challenging, but with some careful consideration, you can select an interesting and relevant topic. Here are seven tips for choosing a good gun control topic with examples:

• Consider current events: Choose a topic that is current and relevant. For example, the impact of the pandemic on gun control policies.
• Narrow your focus: Choose a specific aspect of gun control to focus on, such as the impact of gun control laws on crime rates.
• Consider your audience: Consider who your audience is and what they are interested in. For example, a topic that appeals to gun enthusiasts might be the ethics of owning firearms.
• Research : Conduct extensive research on gun control policies and current events. For example, the impact of the Second Amendment on gun control laws.
• Choose a controversial topic: Choose a controversial topic that will generate discussion. For example, the impact of the NRA on gun control policies.
• Choose a topic that interests you: You can choose an opinion article on gun control that you are passionate about and interested in. For example, the impact of mass shootings on public opinion of gun control.
• Consider different perspectives: Consider different perspectives on gun control and choose a topic that allows you to explore multiple viewpoints. For example, the effectiveness of background checks in preventing gun violence.

You can also buy an essay online cheap from our professional writers. Knowing that you are getting high-quality, customized work will give you the peace of mind and confidence you need to succeed!

Pro-Gun Control Essay Topics

Here are pro-gun control essay topics that can serve as a starting point for your research and writing, helping you to craft a strong and persuasive argument.

• Stricter gun control laws are necessary to reduce gun violence in America.
• The Second Amendment was written for a different time and should be updated to reflect modern society.
• Gun control and gun safety laws can prevent mass shootings and other forms of gun violence.
• Owning a gun should be a privilege, not a right.
• Universal background checks should be mandatory for all gun purchases.
• The availability of assault weapons should be severely restricted.
• Concealed carry permits should be harder to obtain and require more rigorous training.
• The gun lobby has too much influence on government policy.
• The mental health of gun owners should be considered when purchasing firearms.
• Gun violence has a significant economic impact on communities and the nation as a whole.
• There is a strong correlation between high gun ownership rates and higher gun violence rates.
• Gun control policies can help prevent suicides and accidental shootings.
• Gun control policies should be designed to protect public safety while respecting individual rights.
• More research is needed on the impact of gun control policies on gun violence.
• The impact of gun violence on children and young people is a significant public health issue.
• Gun control policies should be designed to reduce the illegal gun trade and access to firearms by criminals.
• The right to own firearms should not override the right to public safety.
• The government has a responsibility to protect its citizens from gun violence.
• Gun control policies are compatible with the Second Amendment.
• International examples of successful gun control policies can be applied in America.

Anti-Gun Control Essay Topics

These topics against gun control essay can help you develop strong and persuasive arguments based on individual rights and the importance of personal freedom.

• Gun control laws infringe on the Second Amendment and individual rights.
• Stricter gun laws will not prevent criminals from obtaining firearms.
• Gun control laws are unnecessary and will only burden law-abiding citizens.
• Owning a gun is a fundamental right and essential for self-defense.
• Gun-free zones create a false sense of security and leave people vulnerable.
• A Gun control law will not stop mass school shootings, as these are often premeditated and planned.
• The government cannot be trusted to enforce gun control laws fairly and justly.
• Gun control laws unfairly target law-abiding gun owners and punish them for the actions of a few.
• Gun ownership is a part of American culture and heritage and should not be restricted.
• Gun control laws will not stop criminals from using firearms to commit crimes.
• Gun control laws often ignore the root causes of gun violence, such as mental illness and poverty.
• Gun control laws will not stop terrorists from using firearms to carry out attacks.
• Gun control laws will only create a black market for firearms, making it easier for criminals to obtain them.
• Gun control laws will not stop domestic violence, as abusers will find other ways to harm their victims.
• Gun control laws will not stop drug cartels and organized crime from trafficking firearms.
• Gun control laws will not stop gang violence and turf wars.
• Gun control laws are an infringement on personal freedom and individual responsibility.
• Gun control laws are often rooted in emotion rather than reason and evidence.
• Gun control laws ignore the important role that firearms play in hunting and sport shooting.
• More gun control laws will only give the government more power and control over its citizens.

Example Essays

Whether you have been assigned to write a gun control research paper or essay, the tips provided above should help you grasp the general idea of how to cope with this task. Now, to give you an even better understanding of the task and set you on the right track, here are a few excellent examples of well-written papers on this topic:

Don’t forget that you always have a reliable essay writing service USA by your side to which you can entrust writing a brilliant essay for you!

Final Words

In conclusion, writing a sample rhetorical analysis essay requires careful analysis and effective use of persuasive techniques. Whether you are a high school student or a college student, mastering the art of rhetorical analysis can help you become a more effective communicator and critical thinker. With practice and perseverance, anyone can become a skilled writer and excel in their academic pursuits.

And if you're overwhelmed or unsure about writing your next AP lang rhetorical analysis essay, don't worry - we're here to help! Our friendly and experienced research paper writers are ready to guide you through the process, providing expert advice and support every step of the way. So why not take the stress out of writing and let us help you succeed? Buy essay today and take the first step toward academic excellence!

Looking to Take Your Academic Performance to the Next Level?

Say goodbye to stress, endless research, and sleepless nights - and hello to a brighter academic future. Place your order now and watch your grades soar!

Related Articles

Gun Control Argumentative Essay: 160 Topics + How-to Guide [2024]

After the recent heartbreaking mass shootings, the gun control debate has reached its boiling point.

Our specialists will write a custom essay specially for you!

Do we need stricter gun control laws ? Should everyone get a weapon to oppose crime? Or should guns be banned overall? You have the opportunity to air your opinion in a gun control argumentative essay.

Below, you’ll find everything you need to write a great paper in no time. Check weighty arguments, catchy gun control essay titles, and the latest sources on the subject.

Don’t forget to check our writing service . With it, you can get your gun control essay done just in a few hours.

🔝 Top 10 Gun Control Essay Titles

💥 take a stand in the gun control debate.

• 👍 Pro Gun Control Essay Topics

👎 Against Gun Control Essay Topics

⚡ gun violence essay titles, ⚖️ gun laws essay topics to explore, 🔫 gun control controversial topics for a research paper, 🔰 pros and cons of gun control, ✍️ 5 steps in writing a gun control essay.

• 🤔 Frequent Questions
• Does gun ownership deter crime?
• Ethics of owning guns for sport.
• Gun control laws and suicide rate.
• Do weapons bring a sense of safety?
• Guns and domestic abuse protection.
• Do gun control laws reduce gun deaths?
• Gun control laws and government tyranny.
• Are gun control laws invasion of privacy?
• Should high-capacity magazines be banned?
• Gun control as a way to reduce the crime rate.

Did you know that 33 people are killed with guns every day in America? This is one of the numbers you can use in your essay on gun control. Are you ready to learn more reasons both for and against gun control? Here they are, in a nutshell:

Have you chosen which side you’re on? Great! Now you already have solid background knowledge on the issue.

Just in 1 hour! We will write you a plagiarism-free paper in hardly more than 1 hour

The information above will help you write an outstanding essay on gun control. Moreover, you can easily proofread it using Grammarly and avoid common grammar mistakes.

👀 150 Catchy Gun Control Topics

Do you want to know the next step toward your A+ gun control essay? It’s a catchy title that expresses your standpoint and grabs your readers’ interest.

Here are some examples.

👍 Pro-Gun Control Essay Topics

Arms possession is a right enshrined in the US constitution. Yet, more and more people voice their concerns about owning firearms. Mass shootings, suicides, and abuse are among the top arguments for stricter laws. Here, we’ve collected plenty of insightful pro-gun control topics for you to explore.

• Pro-gun radicalism and American fears. Guns and fear often go hand in hand. Studies suggest that gun owners are more prone to phobias and distrust. The topic requires showing the irrational essence of gun ownership .
• Being pro-gun equals being anti-women. Firearms make domestic violence a lot more likely to end in death. Prohibiting gun access for abusers could save women’s lives.
• Why background checks don’t always work. Background checks are essential. Yet, they don’t always prevent ineligible individuals from acquiring a firearm . This “why we need gun control” essay shines a light on the procedure’s flaws.
• The economic burden of firearms. This topic concerns the costs linked to gun-related injuries and deaths. These preventable expenditures strain the US economy. You can underline the necessity of gun control to alleviate the problem.
• Gun control to protect schools from firearms. Schools are at the heart of the anti-gun movement. Meanwhile, gun control plays a vital role in preserving safety in educational facilities. An essay could communicate the intricate connection between the two.
• Kids are not ok: pediatric gun-related injuries and deaths. Children often become victims of gun violence. The number of pediatric firearm-related injuries and deaths is disproportionate. Should parents remove all guns from their households to protect their kids?
• Rising gun deaths: a call for action. The high firearm-related death rate is a notorious problem. In the United States, the number is consistently above average. In this gun control argumentative essay, it becomes a reason for stricter gun policies.
• Reducing firearm ownership is not decreasing civil liberties . The topic handles primary gun control opponents’ counterarguments. The key reasoning is that gun ownership is not a universal human right. In this essay, you can explore the notion of civil liberties .
• Suicide and the availability of guns. Gun control topics are rarely concerned with suicide. It’s an essential yet underexplored and part of it. You can show how stricter gun control would help reduce suicide rates .
• More guns, more shootings : understanding gun control. This topic requires exploring the link between firearms and shootings. You can use gun ownership and mass shooting rates to prove your point. In this pro-gun control essay, statistical information is instrumental.
• Gun control as an answer to violent murders.
• Do firearm restrictions harm democracy?
• The perverseness of being pro-life and pro-gun.
• Do guns in households cause more accidental deaths?
• Why are some people scared of stricter gun control ?
• Debunking “guns for self-defense ” myths.
• Gun control’s positive impact on hospitalization rates.
• Does better gun control improve life quality?
• Firearms and suicidal behavior : another case for restrictions.
• What fears drive opponents of gun laws ?
• Do firearms restrictions increase the value of life?
• Do gun laws reduce societal costs?
• Restricting the carry of firearms for societal benefit.
• Does pro-gun activism favor domestic abusers?
• Firearms: used far less for defense than for attacks.
• More guns – more violence
• Stop the wrong people from getting guns
• Revision of the Second Amendment to prevent human tragedies
• The Second Amendment and gun control can co-exist
• The thin line between self-defense and deadly force

Stricter laws can’t solve every problem. In cases such as prostitution and drug use, they are even detrimental. But does this reasoning also apply to gun control? Find it out by discussing its disadvantages with one of the following engaging prompts:

Receive a plagiarism-free paper tailored to your instructions. Cut 20% off your first order!

• Gun control laws : a waste of taxpayers’ money. Firearm restrictions have economic consequences. Additional gun control measures are not free— they require more monetary resources. Besides, stricter gun control deprives many citizens of firearm-related jobs.
• Firearm regulations deny the right to self-defense . Self-defense is a constitutional right granted by the Founding Fathers. When an attacker is armed, defensive gun use remains the only option. Gun control diminishes the capacity of citizens to protect themselves.
• Guns don’t breed crime—society does. Crime is a colossal social challenge. It is vital to direct resources for crime prevention and management. Yet, gun control is not the ultimate solution to this problem.
• Gun control laws are not fruitful . One of the purposes of gun control is to curb the gun violence epidemic. Yet, whether it works or not is debatable. This “is greater gun control a great idea” essay demonstrates gun control’s ineffectiveness.
• Gun control : limiting citizens’ freedoms. Gun control is not only fruitless, but it’s also unconstitutional. The right to possess and carry guns is civil liberty. Firearm restrictions violate the essence of the country’s constitution.
• Gun ownership increases the sense of security. Besides, firearms perform an important psychological function. They give their owners a sense of safety, bringing emotional comfort. Gun control takes away the knowledge that one can protect oneself.
• Firearms black market: a bigger problem. Gun control will not prevent determined individuals from obtaining firearms. Restricting access to legal guns could prompt people to buy weapons from black markets.
• Knives, hardware, and vehicles are lethal weapons , too. Firearms are only a small part of a criminal’s arsenal. For instance, they frequently use cars as deadly weapons. Firearm control can’t always prevent those determined to harm someone from doing it.
• Eliminating guns: an oversimplified approach. Gun control proponents often oversimplify the problem. Access to firearms is not the root cause of gun-related deaths and violence. The phenomenon has multiple origins that you could examine.
• Disarming Americans kills their national identity. Guns are deeply ingrained in American culture and national identity. The right to bear them has a profound symbolic notion. This “against gun control” essay covers the meaning of firearms in American nationhood.
• Gun control hinders African American emancipation.
• How does gun control incite government tyranny?
• Gun control doesn’t prevent violent behavior.
• The racist history behind firearm restrictions .
• The Second Amendment: the cornerstone of gun rights .
• Firearms as an answer to domestic violence .
• Would gun control make the country safer ?
• Firearm ownership : gaining control over life.
• Gun control and the demise of democracy.
• The empowering role of firearms .
• Gun control as a method of disabling citizens.
• What’s your position on the statement: “ Assault is not a weapon but a behavior”?
• Why gun control laws should be scrapped .
• Is there a link between firearm ownership and crime ?
• Banning guns means more black markets.
• Gun control is not the answer – education is
• Gun culture propaganda starts with cartoons
• Mass media is to blame: murder is an easy route to fame
• Gun control : why not ban everything that poses a potential threat?
• Criminals don’t obey gun control laws

Firearm violence has developed into a significant human rights issue. It affects our right to life and health. Not only that, but it can also limit our access to education. Gun violence disrupts school processes and endangers student safety. An essay on this issue gives you many different directions to explore.

• Firearm violence as a racial equity challenge. Studies have shown that some ethnicities are more likely to experience gun violence than others. African Americans , in particular, are affected by the issue. Your essay can investigate how firearm violence reflects and aggravates discrimination.
• The relationship between mental health and mass shootings. Mental illness is the prime suspect as the root of gun violence. Researchers often consider it a determiner for mass shootings . For this topic, it’s vital to analyze literature regarding the correlation.
• Preventing and responding to firearm-related deaths. Each year, thousands of US citizens die due to gun violence . As the rate of firearm death rises, the issue becomes exponentially troubling. Decreasing the gun-related mortality rate is a topic of high priority.
• The socio-economic roots of firearm violence . Gun violence has pronounced socio-economic causes. Low income and life in a deprived neighborhood are among the most significant risk factors. Examining how certain circumstances prompt gun violence is instrumental in alleviating the issue.
• Long-term psychological effects of gun violence . Survivors and witnesses of gun violence experience grave psychological consequences, including PTSD and depression. Your essay can present gun violence as an extremely traumatic event.
• The contagion effect in mass shootings . The contagion effect describes the spread of behavior. You can use it to explain the epidemic of gun violence. The topic requires you to look into the phenomenon.
• Intimate partner violence : the role of firearms. The severity of intimate partner violence is related to how accessible guns are to abusers. Many domestic homicides involve the use of weapons. This gun ownership essay prompts to explain how firearms contribute to the phenomenon.
• Mass shootings and weapon availability. This topic prompts you to investigate the mass shootings aspect of gun violence. In particular, it’s concerned with the link between gun accessibility and mass murder . You could use quotes and statistics regarding gun laws to establish the connection.
• Gun violence : A poignant human rights issue. Firearm violence causes psychological, social, and financial harm. Its victims suffer from long-term consequences in the form of mental disorders. It’s unwise to overestimate the issue’s global burden.
• Gun violence against women and girls. Firearms violence negatively impacts the life quality of women. Women and girls frequently become victims of gun attacks. Here, you could discuss how deep-seated misogyny contributes to the problem.

• The global burden of guns .
• Firearms violence: A community health problem .
• The reasons behind gun violence in the United States .
• A gender profile of firearm violence .
• School shootings : portrayal in media.
• What are the economic consequences of firearm violence?
• Preventing gun violence in vulnerable neighborhoods.
• The role of toxic masculinity in gun violence .
• Discuss the effect of firearm ownership regulations .
• How can the government reduce firearm violence in low-income neighborhoods?
• Psychological consequences of school shootings.
• Supporting school shooting survivors.
• What are the effects of gun ownership on violence?
• The epidemiology of mass shootings .
• Mass shootings from a sociological perspective.
• Fighting against gun violence: social activism .
• Gun violence : the primary cause of premature death.
• What ethical problems occur regarding mass shootings ?
• How does the media promote gun violence?
• The health implications of gun violence .

Gun laws are vital to ensure the safe handling and purchase of firearms. Regulations come from the federal as well the state level. It makes gun laws confusing for many. If you’d like to entangle the issue, this section is for you.

• Major loopholes in gun laws . Federal and state laws are vulnerable to exploitation. It means they contain gaps endangering public safety. The “Charleston loophole” is the most notorious example. You can inspect it along with other deficiencies.
• Gun laws : too strict or too weak? The harshness of gun laws is a debatable issue. Given the present gun violence epidemic, the answer might appear evident. Still, this topic encourages viewing the problem from multiple perspectives.
• Prohibiting the possession of assault weapons. Assault weapons are another intriguing facet of America’s gun problem. Currently, there is no federal law prohibiting their ownership. Using such a weapon in a shooting increases mortality and traumatism.
• The problem with private gun sales. Private firearms trade results in excessive gun accessibility. Private sellers are allowed to bypass crucial standards such as sales recordkeeping. The situation poses a threat to communal well-being.
• Mental illness in the context of firearms control legislation. In the context of gun laws, mental illness is a prominent notion. The term and its usage in state and federal laws have nuances. You can interpret them in your essay.
• Using deadly force to defend property. Firearms constitute a part of the “deadly force” notion. Regarding the defense of private property, its use is not always justifiable. This gun law essay proposes to reflect on the norms of firearm use.
• Nuances and limitations of the stand-your-ground law. The stand-your-ground law is the subject of heated debate. It’s easy to misinterpret it. It most notably concerns the boundaries of gun use. Yet, knowing what is allowed is essential in self-defense .
• The need for federal registration laws. Although there is no national gun registry, its introduction could be beneficial. It would allow law enforcement agencies to track firearms more efficiently. In your essay, you could research other advantages of federal registration as well.
• Differences in gun laws at the state level . Besides federal laws, each state has its own firearms policies. Federal and state regulations tend to vary considerably. It could be interesting to analyze how gun use and possession regulations differ from state to state.
• Buying guns without a background check: a dangerous loophole. Background checks are indispensable under federal law . Still, a loophole makes it possible to sell firearms to incompetent and dangerous individuals. Say what could be done to make background checks more efficient.
• Are tougher gun laws a solution?
• Politically polarizing firearm policies .
• What are the public’s views of federal firearms laws?
• Gun licenses and political affiliation.
• Firearm registration and accessibility of guns to criminals .
• Gun laws : State vs. Federal.
• How are state gun laws and firearm mortality connected?
• Gun laws from the constitutional point of view .
• Understanding the duty to retreat in US legislation.
• Gun-friendly state laws and criminality.

• Open carry and concealed carry laws.
• The extent of federal gun laws .
• Concealed carry: not covered by the Second Amendment .
• Should the US government enforce firearm registration?
• Limiting concealed carry under the influence.
• Weaker gun laws equal less public safety.
• Gun control policies: Democrats vs. Republicans.
• The benefits of a universal background check.
• Analyze gun laws in the state of Missouri .
• Restoring the federal assault weapons ban.

There are few topics more controversial than gun control. That’s why it’s the perfect base for a good debate. Controversies surrounding gun control include questions of race, gender, and ethics.

• Gun ownership: gender, ethnicity, and class . The demographic portrait of a gun owner is a politically loaded subject. Despite the possible implications, it necessitates in-depth research. This topic suggests considering gun owners’ social class, gender, and ethnicity.
• The racial element in American gun culture . Racism and gun control are more connected than might appear. A range of opinions exists. Evaluating their interconnection might yield compelling results. In your essay, investigate American gun culture through the prism of racial inequality.
• Firearms ownership: do we need incentives or fees? Gun ownership has several advantages, such as a sense of security . Nevertheless, its less positive effects could eclipse them. Discussing whether gun ownership should be discouraged or encouraged could help you write an engaging paper.
• The usage of firearms in self-defense. The efficacy and frequency of self-defense weapon use are essential for the gun control debate . Analyzing these factors could help establish the validity of the argument.
• Gun ownership regulation: the Swiss example. In terms of firearm possession, Switzerland is a liberal country. It has lax laws regarding the acquisition and usage of guns. What can Switzerland teach the US about gun control ?
• The ethicality of firearm ownership. It is common to examine whether gun ownership is constitutional. Looking at its ethicality is a rarer approach. This controversial gun control essay topic helps to bridge the knowledge gap.
• Constitutional contradictions regarding gun rights . The Constitution’s meaning is not as self-evident as it may appear. Whether gun rights are constitutional or unconstitutional is at the core of the debate.
• Do gun rights promote vigilantism? Vigilante violence is a severe community challenge. A vengeful armed vigilante is a threat to their society. In your paper, investigate the role of gun rights in contributing to the problem.
• Preventing criminals from accessing guns. How effective is gun control in stopping gun violence? Contradictory opinions denying or supporting its productiveness need scrutiny. For this paper, you can use statistics and facts to clarify the situation.
• The ideology behind gun control and rights. The gun control debate has long gone beyond objective arguments. By now, the problem entails larger political implications. Gun ownership or its absence strongly correlates with political behavior.
• Interpretations of the Second Amendment regarding gun control .
• Does unrestricted gun ownership lead to more shootings ?
• The effectiveness of firearm restrictions.
• Multiple origins of gun-related crime .
• Are gun restrictions instrumental for public safety?
• Gun control as a measure against crime and gun violence .
• Firearm control rhetoric: an analysis.
• Should the public use of guns remain legal?
• Gun control : creating optimal policies.
• Presidential elections and gun control rhetoric.
• Limiting access to guns: is it useful or debilitating?
• Evaluating gun control and its impact on crime.
• The future of gun laws.
• The political battle over gun control .
• Gun policies and common sense.
• How relevant is firearms control?
• What effect does gun ownership have on domestic abuse ?
• The economics of gun control.
• Gun control: Is it saving lives or narrowing freedoms ?
• Should you ever be able to buy a gun without a license or permit?

Gun control pros and cons have been discussed and thoroughly analyzed countless times. Both advocates and opponents have stuck to their positions, leaving the issue unresolved. Here are a few important pros and cons:

Points made in support of gun control (pros)

Get an originally-written paper according to your instructions!

• Gun control statistics reveal that although the United States accounts for only 5% of the world’s population, U.S. residents own 50% of guns in the world.
• When gun deaths statistics for different countries were expressed as the number of gun deaths in a population of a million people, the United States was ranked below South Africa.

Points against gun control (cons)

• The very idea of gun control goes against the US constitution that allows people the right to safeguard their lives. People need guns to defend themselves when being attacked by others. Additionally, firearms can provide a sense of comfort and security. It would be undemocratic to take away a person’s right to feel safe.
• Since the Second Amendment upholds the right to gun ownership, it should not be restricted. It seems dangerous to start altering the constitution whenever we see fit. In doing so, we might create a precedent that others can use to promote more harmful agendas.

Whichever side you chose, now you already have a few persuasive arguments. Let’s move on to the actual writing part.

Writing an impressive essay on gun control can be a bit difficult without proper organization. No matter what type of paper you are going to work on, you’ll need some detailed planning and thorough research.

Follow these five steps to write a perfect gun control essay:

• Define what gun control is. Whether you are writing an argumentative, persuasive, or any other type of paper, the first thing you need is context. Use the definitions that are most appropriate for your essay. For example, you might start with a dictionary definition. Then, add some general facts about types of firearms. Next, you might give statistics on gun control , such as ownership and reasons for it.
• Write a gun control thesis statement. Besides context and definitions, any essay introduction requires a thesis. It’s the message you’re going to argue in the following paragraphs. So, work on it before writing the rest of the paper. Make sure your gun control thesis statement is concise and easy to understand. You can use an online thesis generator if that requirement is hard for you to achieve.
• One option is to use studies that have collected plentiful information over the years.
• If you are writing a pro-gun control essay, you can use studies or statistics on how guns owned by private citizens have killed innocent people. You can also cite cases where students used their parents’ guns to commit violent crimes in school.
• If you are arguing against gun control, cite studies proving that private gun ownership saves lives. You could also add research revealing the positive effects of gun ownership.
• Organize your paper. Of course, the content and organization vary for each particular essay. The facts remain the same. It is the way that you arrange and present them that will create a concrete argument. That’s why you should make sure to draft an outline before you get started.
• End with a strong conclusion. In there, you should summarize your essay and reiterate the most important points. Don’t forget to restate and develop your statement based on the facts you mentioned. If it’s not an argumentative essay, present your findings and suggestions about the issue.

As you can see, writing an impressive gun control essay takes time and effort. It also requires deep research. If you’re finding this task too challenging, you can order an essay from our custom writing service. We provide 100% original papers at reasonable prices.

You might also be interested in:

• Top Ideas for Argumentative or Persuasive Essay Topics
• Best Argumentative Research Paper Topics
• 97 Inspirational & Motivational Argumentative Essay Topics
• Great Persuasive & Argumentative Essay on Divorce
• Proposal Essay Topics and Ideas – Easy and Interesting
• Free Exemplification Essay Examples

🤔 Gun Control FAQ

To create a great title, you should express your point of view in a concise and eye-catching manner. A creative title grabs your readers’ interest. Try to make up an unusual keyword combination, or paraphrase a metaphor or a set expression. Using two opposite ideas works well, too.

If you want to spark a discussion, you need to make an educated standpoint choice. For a good debate essay, make sure to thoroughly study the topic. A list of pros and cons will help you gain a deeper insight. Then decide where you stand before you start writing.

Good persuasive topics provoke emotions. A great topic for an essay is an issue that concerns nearly everyone in society. For example, gun control or animal testing may be good topics for college essays.

Good thesis statements give a clearly formulated opinion. You need to state whether you are for or against gun control. Either way, the author’s position must be based on convincing arguments and facts.

🔗 References

• Gun Control Latest Events
• The Link Between Firearms, Crime and Gun Control
• Gun Control Pros and Cons
• Second Amendment: Right to Bear Arms
• A Brief History of the National Rifle Association
• Gun Control Essays at Bartleby
• Argumentative Essays on Gun Control
• Gun Control Issues, Public Health, and Safety
• Universal Background Checks: Giffords
• Gun Violence: Amnesty International
• Facts on US Gun Ownership: Pew Research Center
• Gun Control in the US: Encyclopedia Britannica
• Gun Control: The Debate and Public Policy: Social Studies
• Guns and Gun Control: The New York Times
• Gun Control Topic Overview: Gale
• US Gun Policy: Global Comparisons: Council of Foreign Relations
• US Gun Debate: Four Dates that Explain How We Got Here: BBC News
• Gun Control and Gun Rights: US News
• Why Gun Control Is So Contentious in the US: Live Science
• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to LinkedIn
• Share to email

Many people believe that childhood is the happiest period in a person’s life. It’s not hard to see why. Kids have nothing to care or worry about, have almost no duties or problems, and can hang out with their friends all day long. An essay about childhood gives an opportunity...

Just when you think you’re way past the question “How to write an essay?” another one comes. That’s the thing students desperately Google: “What is an informative speech?” And our custom writing experts are here to help you sort this out. Informative speaking is a speech on a completely new issue....

Literature courses are about two things: reading and writing about what you’ve read. For most students, it’s hard enough to understand great pieces of literature, never mind analyzing them. And with so many books and stories out there, choosing one to write about can be a chore. But you’re in...

In school and college, you will be required to write research papers. Yes — papers in the plural. And that’s the first reason you may want to turn to Custom Writing and seek help with research projects. When assigned a paper, the very first undertaking is to choose from a...

The success of any college essay depends on the topic choice. If you want to impress your instructors, your essay needs to be interesting and unique. Don’t know what to write about? We are here to help you! In this article by our Custom-Writing.org team, you will find 335 interesting...

Social studies is an integrated research field. It includes a range of topics on social science and humanities, such as history, culture, geography, sociology, education, etc. A social studies essay might be assigned to any middle school, high school, or college student. It might seem like a daunting task, but...

If you are about to go into the world of graduate school, then one of the first things you need to do is choose from all the possible dissertation topics available to you. This is no small task. You are likely to spend many years researching your Master’s or Ph.D....

Persuasive speech is the art of convincing the audience to understand and trust your opinion. Are you ready to persuade someone in your view? Our list of sports persuasive speech topics will help you find a position to take and defend. If you need more options quick, apart from contents...

When you look for a good research paper topic, you can easily become the severest critic of any proposed idea. Some topics do not interest you at the very least, while others might shock your teachers. Where is the golden mean? Check out this list of top 100 research paper...

Can there possibly be anything fun about academic writing? It seems there is – what are all those fun persuasive speech topics then for, after all? However, creating a bunch of good topics might seem hard the first time around. No need to worry though – there’s always plenty of...

A persuasive speech on any topic is a performance designed to convince people about something and prove your point. Choosing a suitable topic is crucial for your speech’s success. Do you need some help with finding easy topics for a persuasive speech? Then check these fantastic and easy ideas from...

Do you know the secret place where people go to get their good informative speech topics? Looking for an interesting topic for speech? Congratulations, because you’ve just found it! So, if you’re ready to get some really good topics for an informative speech, all you need to do is to...

my thing is this it’s not the guns it’s people now if we could make it to where you’ll have to possess a gun ownership license kinda like a drivers license that would solve most problems don’t you think

I agree with you, Richard.

I am trying to cite this website for my English paper on “NoodleTools” and there are multiple things I can’t find. Like the publisher, publication date, “permalink,” and more. I really like this article though!

Grace, glad you liked the article! Regarding the question about citing, maybe this page will help you somehow: https://custom-writing.org/contact

My opinion if I may is that guns should be in the hands of law enforcement and military. If a person wants a gun for protection they only need to call 911 on their cell or landline if a person is frightened to take steps which are many, to ensure your safety guns do kill people and there have been far too many innocent people dying! Football games schools churches concerts outdoor activities and or indoor activities places just about anywhere and people in danger it is terrible. What has become to civilization where people are going about their innocent daily lives and get killed!!!!! What is wrong with this picture? Many years ago American citizens did not have to live in such danger as it is today, the government does nothing including NRA. Congress does nothing, sadly we live in a dangerous and volatile world and something needs to be done about this to prevent innocent children and adults from dangerous people who have guns in their hands the government should protect America from harm and danger!!!!

This helped me with my essay due. I wanted to do it on gun control, but I had no idea where to start. This really helped to develop my thesis statement and claim to turn in. Now I just have to write 8 pages on it. 🙂 Wish me luck, lol.

Do you still have a copy of this essay ?

Good luck, Danielle! 🙂 Glad the article was useful for you.

I think you should add how guns can be a big cause in the world because guns are a bad thing.

Thanks for the advice, Robert!

This helped me with a 5-paragraph essay I need due.

I’m happy the article was useful for you, Dulce!

This article saved me so much time, thank you!!!

Glad to help, Michael!

Thank you! This post helped me a lot with my essay.

Glad the article was helpful for you, Logan!

• Share full article

Gun Control, Explained

A quick guide to the debate over gun legislation in the United States.

By The New York Times

As the number of mass shootings in America continues to rise , gun control — a term used to describe a wide range of restrictions and measures aimed at controlling the use of firearms — remains at the center of heated discussions among proponents and opponents of stricter gun laws.

To help understand the debate and its political and social implications, we addressed some key questions on the subject.

Is gun control effective?

Throughout the world, mass shootings have frequently been met with a common response: Officials impose new restrictions on gun ownership. Mass shootings become rarer. Homicides and suicides tend to decrease, too.

After a British gunman killed 16 people in 1987, the country banned semiautomatic weapons like the ones he had used. It did the same with most handguns after a school shooting in 1996. It now has one of the lowest gun-related death rates in the developed world.

In Australia, a 1996 massacre prompted mandatory gun buybacks in which, by some estimates , as many as one million firearms were then melted into slag. The rate of mass shootings plummeted .

Only the United States, whose rate and severity of mass shootings is without parallel outside conflict zones, has so consistently refused to respond to those events with tightened gun laws .

Several theories to explain the number of shootings in the United States — like its unusually violent societal, class and racial divides, or its shortcomings in providing mental health care — have been debunked by research. But one variable remains: the astronomical number of guns in the country.

America’s gun homicide rate was 33 per one million people in 2009, far exceeding the average among developed countries. In Canada and Britain, it was 5 per million and 0.7 per million, respectively, which also corresponds with differences in gun ownership. Americans sometimes see this as an expression of its deeper problems with crime, a notion ingrained, in part, by a series of films portraying urban gang violence in the early 1990s. But the United States is not actually more prone to crime than other developed countries, according to a landmark 1999 study by Franklin E. Zimring and Gordon Hawkins of the University of California, Berkeley. Rather, they found, in data that has since been repeatedly confirmed , that American crime is simply more lethal. A New Yorker is just as likely to be robbed as a Londoner, for instance, but the New Yorker is 54 times more likely to be killed in the process. They concluded that the discrepancy, like so many other anomalies of American violence, came down to guns. More gun ownership corresponds with more gun murders across virtually every axis: among developed countries , among American states , among American towns and cities and when controlling for crime rates. And gun control legislation tends to reduce gun murders, according to a recent analysis of 130 studies from 10 countries. This suggests that the guns themselves cause the violence. — Max Fisher and Josh Keller, Why Does the U.S. Have So Many Mass Shootings? Research Is Clear: Guns.

Every mass shooting is, in some sense, a fringe event, driven by one-off factors like the ideology or personal circumstances of the assailant. The risk is impossible to fully erase.

Still, the record is confirmed by reams of studies that have analyzed the effects of policies like Britain’s and Australia’s: When countries tighten gun control laws, it leads to fewer guns in private citizens’ hands, which leads to less gun violence.

What gun control measures exist at the federal level?

Much of current federal gun control legislation is a baseline, governing who can buy, sell and use certain classes of firearms, with states left free to enact additional restrictions.

Dealers must be licensed, and run background checks to ensure their buyers are not “prohibited persons,” including felons or people with a history of domestic violence — though private sellers at gun shows or online marketplaces are not required to run background checks. Federal law also highly restricts the sale of certain firearms, such as fully automatic rifles.

The most recent federal legislation , a bipartisan effort passed last year after a gunman killed 19 children and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, expanded background checks for buyers under 21 and closed what is known as the boyfriend loophole. It also strengthened existing bans on gun trafficking and straw purchasing.

— Aishvarya Kavi

Advertisement

What are gun buyback programs and do they work?

Gun buyback programs are short-term initiatives that provide incentives, such as money or gift cards, to convince people to surrender firearms to law enforcement, typically with no questions asked. These events are often held by governments or private groups at police stations, houses of worship and community centers. Guns that are collected are either destroyed or stored.

Most programs strive to take guns off the streets, provide a safe place for firearm disposal and stir cultural changes in a community, according to Gun by Gun , a nonprofit dedicated to preventing gun violence.

The first formal gun buyback program was held in Baltimore in 1974 after three police officers were shot and killed, according to the authors of the book “Why We Are Losing the War on Gun Violence in the United States.” The initiative collected more than 13,000 firearms, but failed to reduce gun violence in the city. Hundreds of other buyback programs have since unfolded across the United States.

In 1999, President Bill Clinton announced the nation’s first federal gun buyback program . The $15 million program provided grants of up to $500,000 to police departments to buy and destroy firearms. Two years later, the Senate defeated efforts to extend financing for the program after the Bush administration called for it to end.

Despite the popularity of gun buyback programs among certain anti-violence and anti-gun advocates, there is little data to suggest that they work. A study by the National Bureau of Economic Research , a private nonprofit, found that buyback programs adopted in U.S. cities were ineffective in deterring gun crime, firearm-related homicides or firearm-related suicides. . Evidence showed that cities set the sale price of a firearm too low to considerably reduce the supply of weapons; most who participated in such initiatives came from low-crime areas and firearms that were typically collected were either older or not in good working order.

Dr. Brendan Campbell, a pediatric surgeon at Connecticut Children’s Medical Center and an author of one chapter in “Why We Are Losing the War on Gun Violence in the United States,” said that buyback programs should collect significantly more firearms than they currently do in order to be more effective.

Dr. Campbell said they should also offer higher prices for handguns and assault rifles. “Those are the ones that are most likely to be used in crime,” and by people attempting suicide, he said. “If you just give $100 for whatever gun, that’s when you’ll end up with all these old, rusted guns that are a low risk of causing harm in the community.”

Mandatory buyback programs have been enacted elsewhere around the world. After a mass shooting in 1996, Australia put in place a nationwide buyback program , collecting somewhere between one in five and one in three privately held guns. The initiative mostly targeted semiautomatic rifles and many shotguns that, under new laws, were no longer permitted. New Zealand banned military-style semiautomatic weapons, assault rifles and some gun parts and began its own large-scale buyback program in 2019, after a terrorist attack on mosques in Christchurch. The authorities said that more than 56,000 prohibited firearms had been collected from about 32,000 people through the initiative.

Where does the U.S. public stand on the issue?

Expanded background checks for guns purchased routinely receive more than 80 or 90 percent support in polling.

Nationally, a majority of Americans have supported stricter gun laws for decades. A Gallup poll conducted in June found that 55 percent of participants were in favor of a ban on the manufacture, possession and sale of semiautomatic guns. A majority of respondents also supported other measures, including raising the legal age at which people can purchase certain firearms, and enacting a 30-day waiting period for gun sales.

But the jumps in demand for gun control that occur after mass shootings also tend to revert to the partisan mean as time passes. Gallup poll data shows that the percentage of participants who supported stricter gun laws receded to 57 percent in October from 66 percent in June, which was just weeks after mass shootings in Uvalde, Texas, and Buffalo. A PDK poll conducted after the shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde found that 72 percent of Republicans supported arming teachers, in contrast with 24 percent of Democrats.

What do opponents of gun control argue?

Opponents of gun control, including most Republican members of Congress, argue that proposals to limit access to firearms infringe on the right of citizens to bear arms enshrined in the Second Amendment to the Constitution. And they contend that mass shootings are not the result of easily accessible guns, but of criminals and mentally ill people bent on waging violence.

— Annie Karni

Why is it so hard to push for legislation?

Polling suggests that Americans broadly support gun control measures, yet legislation is often stymied in Washington, and Republicans rarely seem to pay a political price for their opposition.

The calculation behind Republicans’ steadfast stonewalling of any new gun regulations — even in the face of the kind unthinkable massacres like in Uvalde, Texas — is a fairly simple one for Senator Kevin Cramer of North Dakota. Asked what the reaction would be from voters back home if he were to support any significant form of gun control, the first-term Republican had a straightforward answer: “Most would probably throw me out of office,” he said. His response helps explain why Republicans have resisted proposals such as the one for universal background checks for gun buyers, despite remarkably broad support from the public for such plans — support that can reach up to 90 percent nationwide in some cases. Republicans like Mr. Cramer understand that they would receive little political reward for joining the push for laws to limit access to guns, including assault-style weapons. But they know for certain that they would be pounded — and most likely left facing a primary opponent who could cost them their job — for voting for gun safety laws or even voicing support for them. Most Republicans in the Senate represent deeply conservative states where gun ownership is treated as a sacred privilege enshrined in the Constitution, a privilege not to be infringed upon no matter how much blood is spilled in classrooms and school hallways around the country. Though the National Rifle Association has recently been diminished by scandal and financial turmoil , Democrats say that the organization still has a strong hold on Republicans through its financial contributions and support, hardening the party’s resistance to any new gun laws. — Carl Hulse, “ Why Republicans Won’t Budge on Guns .”

Yet while the power of the gun lobby, the outsize influence of rural states in the Senate and single-voter issues offer some explanation, there is another possibility: voters.

When voters in four Democratic-leaning states got the opportunity to enact expanded gun or ammunition background checks into law, the overwhelming support suggested by national surveys was nowhere to be found. For Democrats, the story is both unsettling and familiar. Progressives have long been emboldened by national survey results that show overwhelming support for their policy priorities, only to find they don’t necessarily translate to Washington legislation and to popularity on Election Day or beyond. President Biden’s major policy initiatives are popular , for example, yet voters say he has not accomplished much and his approval ratings have sunk into the low 40s. The apparent progressive political majority in the polls might just be illusory. Public support for new gun restrictions tends to rise in the wake of mass shootings. There is already evidence that public support for stricter gun laws has surged again in the aftermath of the killings in Buffalo and Uvalde, Texas. While the public’s support for new restrictions tends to subside thereafter, these shootings or another could still produce a lasting shift in public opinion. But the poor results for background checks suggest that public opinion may not be the unequivocal ally of gun control that the polling makes it seem. — Nate Cohn, “ Voters Say They Want Gun Control. Their Votes Say Something Different. ”

Gun Control Essay: Goals, Topics, And How to Write

13 October, 2020

14 minutes read

Author:  Mathieu Johnson

The issue of gun control is yet one of the top topics for heated debates. Some people have rather a negative opinion regarding gun control; others support it and believe that loose gun control rules lead to violence and devastation. And since the topic of gun control is represented by a multitude of contrasting opinions, it might be the topic for your next college paper.

The subject of gun control is an ongoing question, that is why many students either get assigned  a gun control essay or do so for personal motives. What to include in your gun control essay and how to outline your ideas? You can find the answers to your questions in this guide.

Gun Control Essay: Definitions, Goals & Topics

Once you get assigned a gun control essay, you first need to make sure that you fully understand what a paper’s main idea is. As you can tell from the name ‘gun control essay’, such an essay asks you to indicate your opinion regarding restrictive regulations of gun use and production. While most countries have been limiting gun possession to minimize the risk of innocent people dying, the USA hasn’t. On the contrary, the US has persuasive gun control, meaning that almost anyone can buy and hold a gun. Many people share an idea that gun possession should be limited and permitted only to particular categories of people, that is why the question is very ongoing.  So the most critical goal of a gun control essay is to present reasonable ideas about why people need or don’t need gun control. 

Some of the compelling and relevant topics for a gun control essay may be:

• Gun ownership promotes violence among young people
• Gun ownership is unlikely to prevent some people from murdering 
• Gun possession as the only way to protect oneself
• The wide accessibility of guns is the reason for suicides in the US

Gun Control Essay Titles

When writing a pro gun control essay, your initial task is to pick an intriguing, catchy title. You shouldn’t underestimate the importance of such a step if your goal is to attract the reader’s attention and make them aware of a topic. The thing to keep in mind is intriguing the audience and making them willing to take a deep dive into the subject. If you have no precise vision of which title to choose, take a look at a few tips we prepared for you.

First and foremost, you need to have a precise position regarding gun control in America. Are you a supporter, or are you firmly against gun control? Since there is yet a heated debate on this issue in the USA, you can decide to write either a for or against essay on gun control. 

Titles supporting gun control: 

• Violence has never solved any problem
• Guns out of control: why should innocent people die?
• Youth violence as the result of no gun control

Titles opposing gun control:

• Gun control won’t prevent people from killing 
• Gun control: why should we sacrifice our lives just because we can’t defend ourselves?
• Illegal weapons trade as the only guaranteed outcome of gun control.

Gun Control Essay Structure

Most likely, you already know that a good structure largely predicts the success of a gun control argumentative essay. Whenever you are willing to present your opinion on a specific issue and want to convince the audience that your arguments are valid, you should sound logical. The ultimate way to make your gun control essay structure coherent and comprehensive is to draw an outline and plan the essay thoroughly. To assure that your argumentative essay on gun control communicates your idea to the reader, make sure to follow the structure that includes an introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion.

Introduction 

It would help if you organized your gun control essay introduction in a way that serves as an attention grabber. Namely, you can feel free to include some rhetorical question at the beginning or literally any good essay hook. To grab the reader’s attention, you may also outline some background information so that a reader grasps the idea of your gun control persuasive essay. And last but not least, don’t forget to introduce the most important part of a gun control essay outline – a thesis statement. A sound thesis statement gives a reader a general understanding of what you will cover in your essay.

Main body paragraphs’ role is to reveal what you mentioned in the thesis statement. Since your gun control essay will most likely be argumentative, you need to devote one paragraph to one argument. In each and every body paragraph, your main task is to build on some solid evidence and refer to numbers or facts to protect your position. It is better to include 3-5 body paragraphs so that the gun control essay doesn’t look messy. 

When writing a gun control essay conclusion, you should avoid adding any extra information. Try to be very precise and make sure you restate the arguments you have indicated before. All in all, your gun control essay should logically end up with a summary of all the points. The reader has to be 100% sure that he or she fully comprehended your idea. 

Best Tips For Writing Gun Control Essay

An outline is everything.

Create an outline even if you think that this step isn’t indeed necessary. Even when you have all those sparkling ideas and structure in your mind, it requires no effort to confuse them. And if we talk about an argumentative essay, it is fundamental for you as a writer to sound convincing and confident. An outline helps you to sound so. Hence, don’t neglect dedicating a few minutes to creating a helpful essay plan.  

Find some convincing evidence 

The goal of any gun control essay is to communicate an idea of why strict gun control is necessary or should be abandoned. After reading your essay, the audience will form an exact opinion: gun control is either good or bad. Try to search for some substantial evidence, numbers, particular cases that you find helpful while supporting your arguments. Otherwise, you undermine the chances of being heard. 

Write about the topic that bothers you 

Don’t try to figure up titles and topics that aren’t interesting for you. The point of a gun control essay is to make your voice heard and to be sincere while presenting your ideas. Try to give some ideas the way you see them, discuss only those topics that cannot let you stay indifferent. Only in this way will you end up with an excellent essay. 

Edit and proofread

Once your essay is ready, don’t forget to proofread it and check it at least twice. So many excellent essays get a terrible score just because some minor mistakes spoiled the general impression! You can use a wide array of means to make sure your paper is polished: ask your friends to check it, use online tools, or ask a professional essay writing and editing service to get your paper checked by an expert.

Gun Control Essay Examples

If you feel like you need to refer to an example to get a profound insight into an idea of a gun control essay, here is one for you.  

Strict gun control deprives people of their legal rights

The US is the country in which the share of people who own a gun is impressively high. Besides, there is no single country in the world that can be compared to the US by the number of firearms in the citizen’s hands. According to the official statistics, 80 percent of adults own a gun, meaning that the likelihood of  a stranger you come across in the street possessing one are unbelievably significant. Recently, several regulations attempted to restrict gun possession to impose gun control. However, gun control is not only unjustifiable, but it also deprives people of their right for self-defence and peaceful life.

First and foremost, gun control, unfortunately, does not reduce the murder and crime rates in the US. Although it should generally hold true, the statistics contradict the misbelief that limiting gun possession minimizes the number of crimes committed. The research on weapon ban which was carried out during the past twenty years demonstrates that there is no correlation between reducing gun ownership and a falling number of murder cases. The research also indicated that the states that imposed strict gun control have witnessed a larger number of crimes.

This all leads to the conclusion that imposing a ban on gun possession is not a way to fight crime. Also, as the evidence shows, the number of guns in the US had been steadily growing in the last century, and this coincided with a decrease in the number of crimes committed. Essentially, gun control is unlikely to resolve the issue of crimes, since some people are likely to commit crimes even when they have no gun at their disposal.

Another argument against gun control is that the first inevitably infringe the citizen’s rights, Namely, banning weapons contradicts the right that the constitution of the US guarantees. According to the second amendment, under no circumstances should the citizen’s rights to possess a gun  be infringed. The right to own a gun had already existed long before many countries appeared on the map. That is why many people deem gun control as a crime against humanity. Even though there is yet some logical explanation to an attempt to control gun usage and manufacturing, it still deprives US citizens of their inviolable right.

What is even more, the supreme court together with the constitution considers gun ownership as one of the liberties that all the US citizens have. Just like the freedom of speech, the space to protect oneself is crucial, and it should remain untouchable. Introducing gun control, therefore, leads to violating people’s freedom and liberties since people become incapable of even defending themselves in their property.

Gun control robs people of the right for safety and self-defence. Imposing strict gun regulations will inevitably make millions of people incapable of defending themselves if something threatens their and their close ones’ lives. According to the data represented by the National Rifle Association, the number of cases of gun usage solely for self-defence purposes equals 2.5 million times annually. People use guns to protect their families and property, but, apparently, the states find the self-defence motive weak enough. If they impose strict gun control, it means that these 2.5 million people may literally sacrifice their lives and die just because they couldn’t hold a gun legally.

The truth is, the Police are physically incapable of protecting all the people who need protection, so these people are bound to defend themselves on their own. But how to protect yourself  if you cannot even possess a gun? So far, using a weapon for self-defence has proved to be the most effective way . Therefore, depriving people of the right for self-defence or for saving other people in trouble is inhumane and unjustified.

Overall, gun control has lately become a hot topic that has both its advocates and opponents. So far, the evidence against gun control is very reasonable and convincing. Gun control robs the citizens of their exceptional right – the right to protect themselves and those in danger. Besides, gun control contradicts the second amendment, which guarantees the right to possess a gun for adult US citizens. Finally, it is unlikely to reduce the crime rate as the science hasn’t yet found any valid proof for that.

Write a Gun Control Essay with HandmadeWriting

Composing a brilliant essay about gun control is somewhat challenging due to the peculiarity of this topic. But this is not something above your capacity. Keeping all the tips in mind as well as following a precise gun control essay structure will significantly facilitate the writing process. And if you need help with writing or editing – HandmadeWriting will have you covered! At any time of day and night, essay writers at HandmadeWriting work hard to deliver top-quality papers and support students from all over the world. So if you’re struggling with your essay, feel free to get in touch with us. 

A life lesson in Romeo and Juliet taught by death

Due to human nature, we draw conclusions only when life gives us a lesson since the experience of others is not so effective and powerful. Therefore, when analyzing and sorting out common problems we face, we may trace a parallel with well-known book characters or real historical figures. Moreover, we often compare our situations with […]

Ethical Research Paper Topics

Writing a research paper on ethics is not an easy task, especially if you do not possess excellent writing skills and do not like to contemplate controversial questions. But an ethics course is obligatory in all higher education institutions, and students have to look for a way out and be creative. When you find an […]

Art Research Paper Topics

Students obtaining degrees in fine art and art & design programs most commonly need to write a paper on art topics. However, this subject is becoming more popular in educational institutions for expanding students’ horizons. Thus, both groups of receivers of education: those who are into arts and those who only get acquainted with art […]

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Suggested Results

Antes de cambiar....

Esta página no está disponible en español

¿Le gustaría continuar en la página de inicio de Brennan Center en español?

al Brennan Center en inglés

al Brennan Center en español

Informed citizens are our democracy’s best defense.

We respect your privacy .

• Research & Reports

Guns and Democracy

Summary: Gun regulation not only prevents physical harm — it protects citizens’ equal freedom to speak, learn, pray, shop, and vote without fear.

• Second Amendment

This essay is part of the series  Protests, Insurrection, and the Second Amendment .

ABSTRACT:  Recent armed protests in legislatures and in streets across America show that guns can do more than inflict physical injury — they can threaten the public sphere on which a constitutional democracy depends. It follows that gun regulation can do more than prevent physical harm — it can also protect citizens’ equal claims to security and to the exercise of liberties, whether or not they are armed and however they may differ by race, sex, or viewpoint.

Guns and Democracy by The Brennan Center for Justice

Related Issues:

Guns and Domestic Abuse at the Supreme Court

The justices reconsider their originalist Second Amendment ruling.

Second Amendment Meets Domestic Violence in the Supreme Court

In U.S. v. Rahimi, the justices are considering whether to strike down a law that aims to keep guns out of domestic abusers’ hands.

Ban Guns at Voting Sites

Guns don’t belong at polling locations, a smarter path to firearm safety through property rights, originalism run amok at the supreme court, the most dangerous gun ruling in history, at the worst possible time, related resources.

Guns and Voting

To ensure that elections remain peaceful, states must ban guns at places where votes are cast and counted and enact stronger anti-intimidation laws.

Sean Morales-Doyle

Robyn Sanders

Allison anderman, jessica ojeda, testimony of eric ruben for senate hearing “protecting public safety after new york state rifle & pistol association v. bruen”, three supreme court cases to watch beyond abortion rights, a second amendment right to conceal and carry, research report, blm versus #blm, will the supreme court avoid further self-inflicted second amendment wounds, guns and the tyranny of american republicanism, the gun rights movement and “arms” under the second amendment, african americans and the insurrectionary second amendment, a culmination and a crossroads, the police power and the authority to regulate firearms in early america, the role of fantasy in the battered woman’s right to bear arms, expert brief, from theory to doctrine: an empirical analysis of the right to keep and bear arms after heller, the second generation of second amendment law & policy, firearm regionalism and public carry: placing southern antebellum case law in context, informed citizens are democracy’s best defense.

May 26, 2022

The Science Is Clear: Gun Control Saves Lives

By enacting simple laws that make guns safer and harder to get, we can prevent killings like the ones in Uvalde and Buffalo

By The Editors

Adam Gault/Getty Images

Editor’s Note (5/24/23): One year ago, on May 24, 2022, 19 students and two teachers were fatally shot at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Tex . This piece by Scientific American's editors presents the case that simple gun laws can prevent future tragedies.

Some editorials simply hurt to write. This is one.

At least 19 elementary school children and two teachers are dead, many more are injured, and a grandmother is fighting for her life in Uvalde, Tex., all because a young man, armed with an AR-15-style rifle, decided to fire in a school.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

By now, you know these facts: This killing spree was the largest school shooting since Sandy Hook. Law enforcement couldn’t immediately subdue the killer. In Texas, it’s alarmingly easy to buy and openly carry a gun . In the immediate hours after the shooting, President Biden demanded reform , again. Legislators demanded reform , again. And progun politicians turned to weathered talking points: arm teachers and build safer schools.

But rather than arm our teachers (who have enough to do without keeping that gun away from students and having to train like law enforcement to confront an armed attacker), rather than spend much-needed school dollars on more metal detectors instead of education, we need to make it harder to buy a gun. Especially the kind of weapons used by this killer and the white supremacist who killed 10 people grocery shopping in Buffalo . And we need to put a lasting stop to the political obstruction of taxpayer-funded research into gun-related injuries and deaths.

The science is abundantly clear: More guns do not stop crime . Guns kill more children each year than auto accidents. More children die by gunfire in a year than on-duty police officers and active military members. Guns are a public health crisis , just like COVID, and in this, we are failing our children, over and over again.

In the U.S., we have existing infrastructure that we could easily emulate to make gun use safer: the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration . Created by Congress in 1970, this federal agency is tasked, among other things, with helping us drive a car safely. It gathers data on automobile deaths. It’s the agency that monitors and studies seat belt usage . While we track firearm-related deaths, no such safety-driven agency exists for gun use.

During the early 1990s, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention began to explore gun violence as a public health issue. After studies tied having a firearm to increased homicide risk , the National Rifle Association took action , spearheading the infamous Dickey Amendment, diverting gun research dollars and preventing federal funding from being used to promote gun control. For more than 20 years, research on gun violence in this country has been hard to do.

What research we have is clear and grim. For example, in 2017, guns overtook 60 years of cars as the biggest injury-based killer of children and young adults (ages one to 24) in the U.S. By 2020, about eight in every 100,000 people died of car crashes. About 10 in every 100,000 people died of gun injuries.

While cars have become increasingly safer (it’s one of the auto industry’s main talking points in marketing these days), the gun lobby has thwarted nearly all attempts to make it harder to fire a weapon. With federal protection against some lawsuits , the financial incentive of a giant tort payout to make guns safer is virtually nonexistent.

After the Uvalde killings, the attorney general of Texas, Ken Paxton , said he’d “rather have law-abiding citizens armed and trained so that they can respond when something like this happens.” Sen. Ted Cruz emphasized “armed law enforcement on the campus.” They are two of many conservatives who see more guns as the key to fighting gun crime. They are wrong.

A study comparing gun deaths the U.S. to other high-income countries in Europe and Asia tells us that our homicide rate in teens and young adults is 49 times higher. Our firearm suicide rate is eight times higher. The U.S. has more guns than any of the countries in the comparison.

As we previously reported , in 2015, assaults with a firearm were 6.8 times more common in states that had the most guns, compared to the least. More than a dozen studies have revealed that if you had a gun at home, you were twice as likely to be killed as someone who didn’t. Research from the Harvard School of Public Health tells us that states with higher gun ownership levels have higher rates of homicide . Data even tells us that where gun shops or gun dealers open for business, killings go up . These are but a few of the studies that show the exact opposite of what progun politicians are saying. The science must not be ignored.

Science points to laws that would work to reduce shootings, to lower death. Among the simplest would be better permitting laws with fewer loopholes. When Missouri repealed its permit law, gun-related killings increased by 25 percent . Another would be to ban people who are convicted of violent crime from buying a gun. In California, before the state passed such a law, people convicted of crimes were almost 30 percent more likely to be arrested again for a gun or violent crime than those who, after the law, couldn’t buy a gun.

Such laws, plus red flag laws and those taking guns out of the hands of domestic abusers and people who abuse alcohol, would lower our gun violence rate as a nation. But it would require elected officials to detach themselves from the gun lobby. There are so many issues to consider when voting, but in this midterm election year, we believe that protection from gun violence is one that voters could really advance. Surveys routinely show that gun control measures are extremely popular with the U.S. population.

In the meantime, there is some hope. Congress restored funding for gun-related research in 2019, and there are researchers now looking at ways to reduce gun deaths. But it’s unclear if this change in funding is permanent. And what we’ve lost is 20 years of data on gun injuries, death, safety measures and a score of other things that could make gun ownership in this country safer.

Against all this are families whose lives will never be the same because of gun violence. Who must mourn children and adults lost in domestic violence, accidental killings and mass shootings that are so common, we are still grieving one when the next one occurs.

We need to become the kind of country that looks at guns for what they are: weapons that kill. And treat them with the kind of respect that insists they be harder to get and safer to use.

And then we need to become the kind of country that says the lives of children are more valuable than the right to weapons that have killed them, time and again. Since Columbine. Since Sandy Hook. Since always.

Gun Laws regulating and controlling Guns Essay

Introduction, arguments for or against gun laws.

The current violent acts and indiscriminate killings of Americans have shocked the nation and left many people traumatized. The country has suffered because of dangerous individuals who use firearms to commit horrendous acts of violence. There is the need to regulate gun ownership and use in the country.

Proponents of gun laws are concerned that public safety is increasingly diminishing. An instance of this is manifested in the escalating firearm related crimes. On the contrary, the opponents of gun laws are concerned that more restrictive regulations take away their rights for self-defense.

Individuals who use firearms for recreational purposes have also protested against the proposed gun laws. Much as the opponents of firearm regulations have raised strong arguments for the need to continue owning guns, this paper states that the dangerous individuals should be stopped from handling guns in order to stop the unnecessary loss of lives associated with gun violence shows the need to have a more restrictive gun laws.

Americans are divided over the proposal to enact a more restrictive gun laws. Many people have challenged the proposal to legislate stringent firearm regulations. The opponents have argued that Americans must defend themselves against criminals.

They have argued that allowing augmented firearm possession and use for self-protection is the most effective approach to control firearm violence and murder (The White House, 2013). However, the opponents should appreciate that more restrictive gun laws does not take away their self-defense rights. The proposed gun regulations only seek to give law enforcement agencies more apparatus to avert and prosecute firearm violence.

The opponents of gun laws also argue that the Second Amendment expressly allow individuals to own guns for protection purposes. They suggest that an attempt by the government to institute a new legislation on more restrictive firearm use shall take away their civil rights.

They believe that the government shall have acted in a tyrannical manner by restricting their liberty to own firearms. However, it appears that opponents of the restrictive gun regulations do not understand the proposals made proponents of the new gun laws (The White House, 2013). The proposals for restrictive gun laws seek to integrate background checks for firearms sales. This can stop potentially dangerous people from accessing firearms.

The proponents of new gun laws propose to seal gun show loopholes. Promoting more stringent background checks is crucial to shutting all the loopholes (Peters, 2013). Background checks apply to people interested in purchasing firearms. Furthermore, the proposed regulations seek to institute a stronger ban on attack weapons (The White House, 2013).

This seeks to prohibit ownership of dangerous firearms that can kill many people in a short time. The proposals also suggest a robust research on the notable causes of firearm violence in America. The research does not amount to advocacy.

It is a way of generating information on how the government can provide more protection to Americans particularly concerning firearm ownership (The White House, 2013). The new proposal also seeks to make American schools safe by employing more resource personnel to promote emergency response in case of future attacks. Evidently, the proposals have no effect on the rights of Americans to own firearms. Therefore, Americans ought to support the proposed gun laws.

In summary, the recent wave of gun violence in America has affected many families. Opponents have cited diverse reasons for rejecting laws that are more restrictive. However, the proposals advanced by proponents do not present radical effects on the rights of Americans to own guns.

The White House. (2013). Now is the Time to do something about Gun Violence . Web.

Peters, J. (2013). Senators Quietly Seeking New Path on Gun Control . The New York Times. Web.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, January 30). Gun Laws regulating and controlling Guns. https://ivypanda.com/essays/gun-laws-regulating-and-controlling-guns/

"Gun Laws regulating and controlling Guns." IvyPanda , 30 Jan. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/gun-laws-regulating-and-controlling-guns/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'Gun Laws regulating and controlling Guns'. 30 January.

IvyPanda . 2024. "Gun Laws regulating and controlling Guns." January 30, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/gun-laws-regulating-and-controlling-guns/.

1. IvyPanda . "Gun Laws regulating and controlling Guns." January 30, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/gun-laws-regulating-and-controlling-guns/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Gun Laws regulating and controlling Guns." January 30, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/gun-laws-regulating-and-controlling-guns/.

• Gun Registry in Canada
• Gun Control in the United States of America
• Criminal Use of Firearms in the UK
• Gun Control in United States
• Gun Control: Impact on Crime and Gun Availability
• Gun Control in US
• Gun Control: A Case Against Gun Ownership
• Gun Possession Laws Tightening: Pros and Cons
• The Issue of Gun Possession: Canadian Firearms Program
• Carrying a gun for self-defense
• Gun Limitation: Proponents and Opponents of Gun Control
• Political Structure and Process in America
• The Effects of Three American Presidents’ Administrations on Immigrants’ Families
• Evaluate Government Policies to Reduce the Rate of Inflation
• Primary Law's Key Elements

Persuasive Essay Writing

Persuasive Essay About Gun Control

Persuasive Essay About Gun Control - Best Examples for Students

Published on: Jan 9, 2023

Last updated on: Jan 29, 2024

People also read

How to Write a Persuasive Essay: A Step-by-Step Guide

Easy and Unique Persuasive Essay Topics with Tips

The Basics of Crafting an Outstanding Persuasive Essay Outline

Ace Your Next Essay With These Persuasive Essay Examples!

Top Examples of Persuasive Essay about Covid-19

Learn How To Write An Impressive Persuasive Essay About Business

Learn How to Craft a Compelling Persuasive Essay About Abortion With Examples!

Make Your Point: Tips and Examples for Writing a Persuasive Essay About Online Education

Learn How To Craft a Powerful Persuasive Essay About Bullying

Craft an Engaging Persuasive Essay About Smoking: Examples & Tips

Learn How to Write a Persuasive Essay About Social Media With Examples

Craft an Effective Argument: Examples of Persuasive Essay About Death Penalty

Share this article

Gun control is such an issue that often evokes strong opinions from all sides. While some argue that guns should be banned altogether, others think gun ownership is a fundamental right. 

It can be tricky to navigate this complex topic if you're tasked with writing a persuasive essay on gun control. 

But don't worry – we're here to help! 

In this blog, we'll outline the basics of gun control essays and offer examples for crafting a persuasive argument. 

Let's get started!

On This Page On This Page -->

Persuasive Essay Examples on Gun Control

Gun control is an incredibly controversial and divisive issue in the United States, with strong opinions on both sides.

Writing a persuasive essay on this topic is not an easy task. 

To effectively write an essay on gun control, you must have a clear opinion on the subject you want to defend throughout your paper. 

The following are some good examples of persuasive essays on gun control that you can use to help guide your writing.

Essay Examples on Gun Control

Persuasive Essay Against Gun Control

In a persuasive essay against gun control, it is important to explain why gun control has the potential to infringe upon individual rights. 

Here is an example of a persuasive essay against gun control:  

Persuasive Essay on Pro-Gun Control

One of the most controversial topics surrounding gun control is pro-gun control. 

In a persuasive essay, the writer may argue in favor of pro-gun control and provide examples to support their stance. 

Here are a few examples of persuasive essays on pro-gun control. 

Short Persuasive Essay on Pro-Gun Control

Argumentative Essay About Gun Control

An argumentative essay on gun control is an academic piece that presents both sides and provides evidence supporting one side. 

Here are a few examples.

Short Argumentative Essay About Gun Control

Check out these examples of argumentative essays on gun control. 

Short Argumentative Essay on Pro-Gun Control

Tough Essay Due? Hire a Writer!

Tips to Write a Persuasive Essay

Persuasive essays can be tricky. Still, with some tips from the experts, you'll be able to write one that truly convinces your reader of your argument. 

So what are you waiting for? Check out these six tips for persuasive essay writing!

Choose Your Position

Before beginning the writing process, decide which side of the argument you will take and state it clearly in your thesis statement. 

Choose a Strong Thesis Statement

The thesis statement is your argument boiled down to one sentence. It should clearly state your opinion on the topic and give a sense of direction for the rest of the essay. 

Research Extensively

To make a good persuasive essay, you need to back up your opinion with facts, figures, and other research. 

Take the time to explore all sides of the issue and consider different points of view. Make sure your evidence is both relevant and reliable.

Check out this video explaining essential tips and tricks for writing a persuasive essay.

Create an Outline 

A good persuasive essay has a clear structure that is easy for the reader to follow. An outline can help you organize your ideas and arguments to flow logically.

Check out our amazing blog on how to write a persuasive essay outline here. 

Use Strong Language

Choose words that are powerful and precise. Powerful language can make your argument more convincing. Take the time to craft sentences that make an impact. 

Make It Personal

Connect with readers on an emotional level by sharing stories and experiences. This will help you to create a connection between your argument and the reader. It will make them more likely to agree with you.

Edit Thoroughly

Take the time to edit your essay, so it’s clear and concise. Check for grammar or spelling mistakes and arguments that don’t make sense. 

Thorough editing can also help you remove unnecessary information, making your essay more persuasive. 

These tips should help you write a strong and effective persuasive essay. 

Persuasive Essay Topics About Gun Control

Let’s explore a few persuasive essay topics about gun control that might help get your point across.

• Should the government implement stricter gun control regulations?
• How can Congress work to reduce gun-related deaths and injuries? 
• Is the Second Amendment an outdated law that should be revised? 
• Should individuals be allowed to carry firearms in public places? 
• Are laws requiring background checks on gun purchases effective? 
• Are concealed carry laws a good idea? 
• What are the risks and benefits of having private citizens own guns? 
• Should states have the right to set their gun laws? 
• Is there a role for mental health professionals in developing gun control policies? 
• How can we prevent children from accessing firearms? 
• What role does the media influencing people’s opinions on gun control? 
• Does the NRA hold too much sway over legislators regarding gun control laws? 
• Is stricter gun control legislation the best way to reduce mass shootings? 
• Are smart gun technologies viable for promoting responsible firearm ownership? 
• How can we work together to create more effective gun control laws?

Take a look at more detailed  persuasive essay topics  to get inspired.

Whether you are for or against gun control, conduct thorough research and use evidence when writing your paper.

So keep these tips in mind and start writing your gun control essay today!

So here you have it! We’ve provided excellent examples of persuasive essays on gun control for your reference, but don’t stop there!

Take a look at our website and see how our persuasive essay writing service can help you take your writing skills to the next level. 

Our expert persuasive essay writer is here to help to craft a compelling essay in no time. Our online essay writing service is available to you 24/7. Just complete the easy order process, and our essay writer will start working to deliver a masterpiece to you. 

At CollegeEssay.org, we are experts at helping students write essays that will get them the grades they need and want.

Try our AI essay generator and breeze through your assignments today!

Frequently asked Questions

What should be included in a persuasive essay outline.

A persuasive essay outline should include the thesis, evidence, counterarguments, and conclusion. It is important to structure your argument logically to effectively communicate your point of view to readers.

How do I write a strong persuasive essay?

To write a strong persuasive essay, you should start by thoroughly researching your topic and familiarizing yourself with both sides of the argument. You should structure your essay using an effective introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion. 

What are good sources for writing a persuasive essay?

When writing a persuasive essay, it is important to use credible sources. Examples of good sources include scholarly journals, government documents, and reputable websites. Make sure you check the credibility of any source before using it in your essay.

Cathy A. (Literature, Marketing)

For more than five years now, Cathy has been one of our most hardworking authors on the platform. With a Masters degree in mass communication, she knows the ins and outs of professional writing. Clients often leave her glowing reviews for being an amazing writer who takes her work very seriously.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That’s our Job!

Keep reading

Legal & Policies

• Privacy Policy
• Cookies Policy
• Terms of Use
• Refunds & Cancellations
• Our Writers
• Success Stories
• Our Guarantees
• Affiliate Program
• Referral Program
• AI Essay Writer

Disclaimer: All client orders are completed by our team of highly qualified human writers. The essays and papers provided by us are not to be used for submission but rather as learning models only.

Gun Control Argumentative Essay – Sample Essay

Published by gudwriter on October 21, 2017 October 21, 2017

A Break Down of my Gun Control Argumentative Essay

Styling Format: APA, 6th Edition

Elevate Your Writing with Our Free Writing Tools!

Did you know that we provide a free essay and speech generator, plagiarism checker, summarizer, paraphraser, and other writing tools for free?

Title: Stricter Gun Control Laws Should Be Adopted

Introduction

I have tried to design the introduction in such a way that it attracts the attention of the reader and gives him an idea of the essay’s focus. My first sentence comprises of some startling information: The pervasive gun culture in the United States of America is a creation of the country’s frontier expansion, revolutionary roots, colonial history, and the Second Amendment. It is not totally new information to the readers. In fact, it is a pertinent fact that explicitly illustrates the point that I wish to make. It is followed by a sentence of elaboration. In addition, I have tried to ground the reader with some information that is relevant to understand my thesis. Lastly, I have finished my paragraph with a thesis statement for my argumentative essay.

To get your essay on gun control written for a cheap price, connect with a professional research paper writer for help on this platform where we have a pool of experts to choose from, making it easy for you to get matched fast. You can also use our essay generator to get a quality and plagiarism free paper.

The body of my gun control essay contains reasons + evidence to support my thesis. Each body paragraph begins with a topic sentence that identifies the main idea of that paragraph. If you have read the essay, you can see that my explanations try to answer a simple question: how does this evidence support my thesis?

I have tried to sum up my points and provide a final perspective on gun control in an effort to bring closure to the reader. I have reviewed my main points, trying not restate them exactly, and tried to briefly describe my feelings concerning the topic. I was unable to find a good anecdote that would have ended my essay in a useful way.

References:

Though, I won’t recommend it, I have used some news articles from CNBC and NYTimes as part of my references. I would advise you to go for more credible sources such as peer reviewed articles and journals.

Argumentative Essay on Gun Control

Gun control is a controversial subject in the United States of America. In the wake of so many tragic mass shootings, like the recent Las Vegas Shooting, the conversation  tends to pull in two directions : Those who believe gun laws should be less strict and those pushing for more restrictions.

When you are writing a gun control argumentative essay, you are free to take any side you want, unless your instructor specifically tells you to take a certain side. What matters is that whichever position you choose, ensure you have good points and supporting facts.

In this gun control essay, I have decided to take a pro gun control approach:  strict regulation up to and including an outright ban on firearms. In fact, my thesis statement for this for argumentative essay is  stricter gun control laws should be enacted and implemented if the United States is to solve the problem of mass shootings and reduce crime within its borders.

My essay is divided into three basic parts, the introduction, the body and the conclusion.

Here is my gun control argumentative essay. Enjoy!

Stricter Gun Control Laws Should Be Adopted

The pervasive gun culture in the United States of America is a creation of the country’s frontier expansion, revolutionary roots, colonial history, and the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment stipulates, “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” (“Second Amendment,” 2020). The argument fronted by proponents of stricter gun control laws is that the amendment targeted militias and not the common citizen. They are of the view that gun control restrictions have always been there and that they serve to enhance the security of the country and the various states. The opponents however argue that through the provisions of the Second Amendment, individuals have the right to own guns. Their view is that individuals need guns for self-defense and that gun ownership thwarts criminal activities. This paper argues that stricter gun control laws should be enacted and implemented if the United States is to solve the problem of mass shootings and reduce crime within its borders (my argumentative essay thesis statement ).

On 1st October, 2017, the U.S. witnessed one of the worst mass shooting incidences in its history, probably the worst. The shooting, as observed by Swift (2017), was conducted by a common U.S. citizen who was a gun owner. Following the incidence, there has been rage and confusion all over the country as to whether the gun control debate is still relevant. A whopping 59 people died in the incidence with 500 others sustaining serious injuries (Swift, 2017). This incidence alone, the Second Amendment notwithstanding, tells why the country is in dire need of very strict gun control laws. Nothing can compensate for human life and it is even worse when life is lost at the hands of another human being. It becomes more serious when one person decides to kill, without stopping to think, as many people as time and other factors would allow them to! The latest gun incidence is a clear sign that the threat of lives being lost due to misuse of personal guns is more real than the threat of one losing their life due to lack of self-defense.

Given the latest mass shooting incidence, together with such other past incidences, it could be safely argued that the Second Amendment is being misinterpreted to mean what the framers of the Constitution never intended nor meant. It is high time the three branches of the federal government, together with the states, sought a clear reinterpretation of “well-regulated militia”. It cannot be that those who effected this amendment “authorized” what was recently witnessed in Las Vegas. As pointed out by Insana (2017), “The Founding Fathers, who lived before the invention of the Gatling gun, could not have envisioned civilians commanding the right to hunt turkeys, or humans, with modern ferocity”. The Second Amendment is surely not a leeway for citizens to have unlimited rights to own guns. A well-regulated militia should imply that a state, or the country, adequately serves its law enforcement agencies with the right ammunition and weaponry so as to ensure security. This has however unfortunately been misinterpreted to mean anyone can own a gun.

Stricter gun control laws would reduce deaths resulting from individually owned guns. Street (2016) reports that between 1999 and 2013, the number of gun deaths totaled 464,033. Out of this, 270,237 were gun suicide cases, 9,983 were unintentional deaths, and 174,773 homicides. It is thus crystal clear that mass shooting is not the only way in which guns are being used for the wrong purposes. It is emerging that giving an American citizen the right to own a gun is akin to giving them a shorter way of executing their evil plan of killing themselves, if they had it that is. If a gun is meant for self-defense and crime prevention, isn’t gun suicide the exact opposite of this? As a matter of fact, one would be safer from their own selves without a gun than with a gun. This is why it should be made tremendously difficult for people to acquire guns.

Opponents of gun control laws argue that introduction of such laws would deny people a sense of safety by infringing upon their right to self-defense. This argument is oblivious of the fact that weak gun control laws compromise even the safety of the gun holder himself or herself (Purcell, 2013). Moreover, it is the role of the federal government to ensure that every American citizen is always safe irrespective of the part of the country they find themselves. Building and maintaining strong security agencies is enough to ensure this. On the same note, the “right to self-defense” argument would lose its meaning if an individual cannot first of all defend themselves against themselves. When a person knowingly or unknowingly harms themselves using a gun they own, it means they lack the very self-defense they acquired the gun for.

To take their argument even further, the opponents would contend that the Second Amendment gives every American the right to possess personal guns. They often cite the phrase “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” (Burke, 2017), with more emphasis on the “shall not be infringed” part. They forget that the same clause contains some “well regulated militia” part which should be equally given as much weight as the other parts. While it is true that this right should not be infringed, according to the Constitution, it should not culminate in anybody being allowed to own guns. If the right is as absolute as opponents suggest, firearms would be owned by children and even mentally ill felons, a situation one can never wish for. It is thus a farfetched and unnecessary argument.

The enactment and implementation of very strict gun control laws by the United States is long overdue. People cannot continue butchering innocent citizens in the name of enjoying the provisions of the Second Amendment. If it is the Second Amendment that is creating all this loss of life and lawlessness, it should be thoroughly reinterpreted so that it works in the best interest of all Americans. Nobody has the right to take their own life and that of others. It is sad that gun ownership perpetuates this phenomenon. This discussion reveals that gun ownership is neither promoting self-defense nor deterring crime but promoting the same.

Burke, D. E. (2017). “Why the arguments against gun control are wrong”.   Huffpost . Retrieved July 11, 2020 from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/why-the-arguments-against-gun-control-are-wrong_us_59d6405ce4b0666ad0c3cb34. Accessed 29 June 2020

Insana, R. (2017). “The time for polite debate on gun control is over”. CNBC . Retrieved October 20, 2017 from https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/05/the-time-for-polite-debate-on-gun-control-is-over.html

Purcell, T. (2013). Shotgun republic: the gun control debate . North Charleston, SC: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.

Second Amendment. (2020). In Cornell Law School . Retrieved July 11, 2020 from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/second_amendment

Street, C. (2016). Gun control: guns in America, the full debate, more guns less problems? no guns no problems? . North Charleston, SC: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.

Swift, H. (2017). “Gunman’s girlfriend arrives in U.S. and is expected to be questioned”. The New York Times . Retrieved October 20, 2017 from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/03/us/las-vegas-shooting-live-updates.html

Sample 2: Gun Control Essay Outline

Thesis:  Gun control is important for solving mass shooting problems and crime reduction.

Paragraph 1:

Stricter gun control laws are needed for addressing the persistent mass shooting problem in the U.S.

• The gun control debate might have been made irrelevant by probably the worst mass shooting in the U.S. history that occurred on October 1, 2017 in Las Vegas.
• The shooting claimed 59 lives and left 500 people with serious injuries.
• The Second Amendment does not allow for such heinous acts in the name of owning a gun.
• Innocent lives should not be lost at the hands of one person who judges it right to terminate human lives.

Paragraph 2:

Gun control would help address misinterpretation of the Second Amendment by individual gun owners.

• It is apparent that people are misinterpreting the amendment to mean what was not intended by framers of the constitution.
• A clear reinterpretation of a “well-regulated militia” should be sought.
• Those who debated over and passed the amendment could not have authorized mass shootings of innocent citizens.

Paragraph 3:

Deaths resulting from individually-owned guns would decrease if stricter gun laws were adopted.

• Between 1999 and 2013, there were 464,033 gun deaths out of which 174,773 resulted from homicides, 9,983 from gun accidents, and 270,237 from suicide.
• Thus, individual gun owners are using guns in more destructive ways than just mass shootings.
• Gun suicide is the exact opposite of self-defense and crime prevention, the reasons for which gun ownership was allowed.

Paragraph 4: 

The quantity of guns in a society determines the rate of gun violence in the society.

• A good case example to prove this is Japan.
• The country has made it very difficult for its citizens to acquire guns.

Paragraph 5:

Opponents of gun control argue that gun control laws would infringe into people’s right to self-defense and thus deny them a sense of safety.

• This argument fails to recognize that even the safety of the gun holder herself or himself is compromised by weak gun control laws.
• Moreover, the safety of all American citizens wherever they may be is the responsibility of the federal government.
• It would be enough to guarantee this safety by building and maintaining strong security agencies and policies.

Paragraph 6:

Opponents argue that gun control laws give too much power to the government and that this may make the government tyrannical.

• This argument is wrong because the United States is a country founded on strong Constitutional provisions that clearly spell out the rights of citizens and indicate that the country is democratic.
• There is no room for government tyranny.

The U.S. should enact and implement very strict gun ownership laws if it is to solve mass shooting problems and reduce gun-related crime. People cannot purport to be enjoying the provisions of the Second Amendment while continuing to butcher innocent citizens.

Sample Essay 2: Gun Control Essay

The United States continues to experience a pervasive gun culture owing to its colonial history, revolutionary roots, frontier expansion, and the Second Amendment. According to the Second Amendment, “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” (Cornell Law School, 2017). Proponents of gun control argue that the amendment did not target the common citizen but militias. However, the opponents argue that the amendment guarantees express rights for individual gun ownership. This paper argues that gun control is important for solving mass shooting problems and crime reduction.

Stricter gun control laws are needed for addressing the persistent mass shooting problem in the U.S. The gun control debate might have been made irrelevant by probably the worst mass shooting in the U.S. history that occurred on October 1, 2017 in Las Vegas. The shooting, conducted by a common citizen possessing a gun, claimed 59 lives and left 500 people with serious injuries (Swift, 2017). The Second Amendment does not allow for such heinous acts in the name of owning a gun. So many innocent lives should not be lost at the hands of one person who judges it right, out of their personal reasons, to terminate human lives. The mass shooting incidences clearly indicate that there is more threat of lives being lost through misuse of guns than the threat of people losing their lives due to lack of self-defense.

Gun control would also help address misinterpretation of the Second Amendment by individual gun owners. It is apparent that people are misinterpreting the amendment to mean what was not intended by framers of the constitution given the past shooting incidences. A clear reinterpretation of a “well-regulated militia” should be sought by the three federal government braches in collaboration with the state governments. It is definite that those who debated over and passed the amendment could not have authorized the October 1, 2017 Las Vegas shooting incidence and such other incidences. Moreover, “The Founding Fathers, who lived before the invention of the Gatling gun, could not have envisioned civilians commanding the right to hunt turkeys, or humans, with modern ferocity” (Insana, 2017). The amendment was meant for protection of lives, not as a threat to lives.

Additionally, deaths resulting from individually-owned guns would decrease if stricter gun laws were adopted. Between 1999 and 2013, there were 464,033 gun deaths out of which 174,773 resulted from homicides, 9,983 from gun accidents, and 270,237 from suicide (Street, 2016). It is thus crystal clear that individual gun owners are using guns in more destructive ways than just mass shootings. It is apparent that letting an American citizen own a personal gun provides them with a quicker way of committing suicide if they had the plans to. Noteworthy, gun suicide is the exact opposite of self-defense and crime prevention, the reasons for which gun ownership was allowed. Acquiring guns should thus be made very difficult for people since it would make them safer from their own selves.

Another general observation is that the quantity of guns in a society determines the rate of gun violence in the society. A good case example to prove this is Japan. Research notes that the country has made it very difficult for its citizens to acquire guns. Even upon being allowed to acquire one, it would only be an air rifle or shotgun but not handguns (Low, 2017). Low (2017) goes on to cite the executive director of Action on Armed Violence, Iain Overton, who argues that a civilian society does not need guns for whatever reason. Overton adds that gun violence will inevitably be there in a society once the society has guns. According to journalist Anthony Berteaux, violence should never be used to quell violence hence the less need for guns.

Opponents of gun control argue that gun control laws would infringe into people’s right to self-defense and thus deny them a sense of safety. This argument fails to recognize that even the safety of the gun holder herself or himself is compromised by weak gun control laws (Purcell, 2013). Moreover, the safety of all American citizens wherever they may be is the responsibility of the federal government. It would be enough to guarantee this safety by building and maintaining strong security agencies and policies. Besides, if an individual cannot first of all defend themselves against themselves, the “right to self-defense” argument loses its meaning. When a person uses their own gun to cause self-harm either knowingly or unknowingly, it means they lack the very self-defense the gun is meant for.

Opponents may also argue that gun control laws give too much power to the government and that this may make the government tyrannical. In their view, the government may end up taking away guns from all citizens. This argument is wrong first because the United States is a country founded on strong Constitutional provisions that clearly spell out the rights of citizens and indicate that the country is democratic (Kopel, 2013). There is thus no room for government tyranny, not even through gun control. Second, stricter gun laws would only make difficult the process of acquiring guns but not take away all guns from citizens.

The U.S. should enact and implement very strict gun ownership laws if it is to solve mass shooting problems and reduce gun-related crime. People cannot purport to be enjoying the provisions of the Second Amendment while continuing to butcher innocent citizens. The amendment should be reinterpreted so that it serves all citizens in the best manner possible if it is what is creating all this loss of life and lawlessness. The Constitution does not provide for the “right” of taking one’s own life or that of others. It is thus sad that this phenomenon is being perpetuated by gun ownership.

Ready for a globalization essay sample ? Check it out.

Cornell Law School. (2017). “Second amendment”.  Cornell Law School . Retrieved May 20, 2018 from  https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/second_amendment

Insana, R. (2017). “The time for polite debate on gun control is over”.  CNBC . Retrieved May 20, 2018 from  https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/05/the-time-for-polite-debate-on-gun-control-is-over.html

Kopel, D. B. (2013).  The truth about gun control . New York, NY: Encounter Books.

Low, H. (2017). “How Japan has almost eradicated gun crime”.  BBC News . Retrieved July 4, 2020 from  http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-38365729

Purcell, T. (2013).  Shotgun republic: the gun control debate . North Charleston, SC: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.

Street, C. (2016).  Gun control: guns in America, the full debate, more guns less problems? No guns no problems? . North Charleston, SC: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.

Swift, H. (2017). “Gunman’s girlfriend arrives in U.S. and is expected to be questioned”.  New York Times . Retrieved May 20, 2018 from  https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/03/us/las-vegas-shooting-live-updates.html

More examples of Argumentative Essays written by our team of professional writers

• Same Sex Marriage Argumentative Essay, with Outline
• American Patriotism Argumentative Essay
• Argumentative Essay On Marijuana Legalization
• Euthanasia Argumentative Essay Sample
• Argumentative Essay on Abortion – Sample Essay
• Artificial Intelligence Argumentative Essay
• Can Money Buy Happiness Argumentative Essay, With Outline
• Illegal Immigration Argumentative Essay

Special offer! Get 20% discount on your first order. Promo code: SAVE20

Related Posts

Free essays and research papers, artificial intelligence argumentative essay – with outline.

Artificial Intelligence Argumentative Essay Outline In recent years, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become one of the rapidly developing fields and as its capabilities continue to expand, its potential impact on society has become a topic Read more…

Synthesis Essay Example – With Outline

The goal of a synthesis paper is to show that you can handle in-depth research, dissect complex ideas, and present the arguments. Most college or university students have a hard time writing a synthesis essay, Read more…

Examples of Spatial Order – With Outline

A spatial order is an organizational style that helps in the presentation of ideas or things as is in their locations. Most students struggle to understand the meaning of spatial order in writing and have Read more…

You are leaving

You will be redirected momentarily.

• Share on Twitter
• Share on Facebook
• Email this page
• See the Research

Safety in Numbers is our new monthly newsletter highlighting all things Team Research here at Everytown. Get to know our work and get to know us!

The Danger of Guns on Campus

Learn more:.

• Educate Gun Owners of Risks
• Guns in Public
• Guns in Schools
• Keep Guns Off Campus
• Mass Shootings
• Prohibit Guns in Sensitive Areas
• Reconsider Active Shooter Drills
• Stop Arming Teachers
• Threat Identification and Assessment Programs in Schools

Introduction

James Madison, the author of the Second Amendment, and Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, believed guns had no place on college campuses. In 1824, at a University of Virginia Board of Visitors meeting, both Madison and Jefferson supported a rule prohibiting firearm possession and use by students at the university. 1 Olivia Li and The Trace, “When Jefferson and Madison Banned Guns on Campus,” The Atlantic , May 6, 2016, https://bit.ly/2VvHL8E .

Over the last decade, the gun lobby and its allies have introduced legislation that would force colleges and universities to allow guns on campus. This legislation, which would create new dangers for students and staff and burden schools with significant financial costs, is widely opposed by university stakeholders from students to college presidents to police chiefs. Statehouses should not override the judgment of our colleges and universities, especially given the already unprecedented challenges they are facing during the pandemic risk factors common to campus life.

Research shows that policies that force colleges to allow guns on campuses are likely to lead to more shootings, homicides, and suicides, and that they’re unlikely to prevent mass shootings on campus. 2 Daniel W. Webster et al., “Firearms on College Campuses: Research Evidence and Policy Implications,” Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, October 15, 2016, https://bit.ly/2WmmWNm . Despite this, the National Rifle Association (NRA) began its push to force colleges and universities to allow guns on campus following multiple high-profile campus shootings. In 2008, after the 2007 mass shooting at Virginia Tech that killed 32 people, and another in 2008 at Northern Illinois University that killed five people, the NRA proposed, and the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) adopted, a model bill that would force colleges to allow guns on campus. 3 National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, “ALEC Task Force Adopts Model ‘Campus Personal Protection Act,’” May 23, 2008, https://bit.ly/33LTh4i . The push has accelerated ever since, with bills to force colleges to allow guns introduced in 37 states since 2015. 4 AK, AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, IA, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, MT, NC, ND, NH, NM, NV, OH, OK, OR, SC, SD, TN, TX, VA, WA, WI, WV, WY.

The gun lobby claims that guns on campus is a Second Amendment issue, but the Supreme Court of the United States disagrees. Writing for the majority in District of Columbia v. Heller, Justice Scalia wrote that the Second Amendment does not cast doubt on the validity of “laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools…” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 627 (2008).

The vast majority of states either prohibit guns on campus or allow colleges to decide for themselves. 5 Sixteen states and DC effectively prohibit the concealed carrying of guns on campus. California: Cal. Penal Code § 626.9(h); District of Columbia: D.C. Code Ann. § 22-4502.01(b), (c); Florida: Fla. Stat. § 790.06(12); Illinois: 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/24-1(a)(4), (a)(9), (a)(10), (c)(1.5), (c)(4); Louisiana: La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 40:1379.3(N)(11), 14:95.2, 14:95.6; Massachusetts: Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 269, § 10(j); Michigan: Mich. Comp. Laws § 28.425o(1)(h); Missouri: Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.107.1(10); Nebraska: Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 69-2441(1)(a), 28-1204.04(1); Nevada: Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 202.3673(3)(a), 202.265(1)(e); New Jersey: N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:39-5e; New Mexico: N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-7-2.4(A); New York: N.Y. Penal Law §§ 265.01(3), 265.01-a; North Carolina: N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 14-269.2(b), (i); North Dakota: North Dakota N.D.C.C.§ 62.1-02-05; South Carolina: S.C. Code Ann. § 16-23-420; Wyoming: Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-8- 104(t). In 22 states, colleges set their own firearm policies. Across these states, almost every school has chosen not to allow guns on campus: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky; Maine; Maryland; Montana; New Hampshire; Ohio; Oklahoma; Pennsylvania; Rhode Island; South Dakota; Vermont; Virginia; Washington; West Virginia. Only two states force colleges to allow all concealed carry permit holders to carry guns everywhere on campus: Colorado and Utah. 6 Colorado: Regents of University of Colorado v. Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, LLC, 2012 CO 17 (Co.); Utah: Utah Code Ann. §§ 53-5a-102(4), 53B-3-103. Ten other states force colleges to allow guns on campus in some circumstances: Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Minnesota, Mississippi, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. 7 In Arkansas, Idaho, and Mississippi, only people with “enhanced” carry permits may carry guns on campus. Arkansas: 2017 HB 1249; Idaho: 2014 SB 1254; Mississippi: 2011 Miss. ALS 338, codified at Miss. Code Ann. §§ 45-9-101(13), 97-37-7(2). Colleges and universities in Oregon and Wisconsin must allow guns on campus but prohibit them in university buildings. Oregon: Oregon Firearms Educational Foundation v. Board of Higher Education et al., 245 Or. App. 713 (2011), Or. Rev. Stat. § 351.060; Wisconsin: Wis. Stat. §§ 943.13(1m)(c), (bm)(2)(am), Wis. Adm. Code UWS 18.10. Texas: In Texas, university presidents may establish reasonable rules regarding the carrying of concealed handguns by permit holders, as long as the rules don’t generally prohibit permit holders from carrying concealed handguns on the campus. Texas Gov’t Code § 411.2031(d-1). Minnesota: In Minnesota, colleges and universities must allow guns on campus but may prohibit students and employees from carrying on campus. Minn. Stat. § 624.714 subd. 18. Tennessee: In Tennessee, colleges and universities must allow full-time employees to carry guns on the campus where they work. Colleges and universities are allowed to prohibit full-time employees from carrying guns in certain specified buildings and areas on campus. 2016 S.B. 2376, codified at §§ 39-17-1309 (11)–(13). Georgia: In Georgia, public colleges must generally allow concealed guns on campus if they are carried by permit holders, but guns are not allowed to be carried in student housing (including fraternity and sorority houses), at sporting events, in preschool or child care facilities, at classes of certain specialized schools, in classes in which dually enrolled high school students are present, at faculty, staff, or administrative offices, or at disciplinary hearings. 2017 GA HB 280, codified at O.C.G.A. § 16-11.127.1 Kansas: In Kansas, a 2013 law (2013 Kan. ALS 105) allows people to carry guns on public campuses but allowed schools to opt out of those provisions for a maximum of four years. All public universities did so, but effective July 1, 2017, opting out will be possible only if the schools set up rigorous security measures. Kansas is also the only state where a permit is not required to carry a concealed handgun on campus. K.S.A. § 75-7c10(a)(11).

In the small number of states that have forced guns on to college campuses, there is no evidence that it has helped prevent mass shootings. Nor is there any reason to expect this policy to stop in-progress shootings: Under extreme duress, an armed college student or university professor cannot be expected to transform into a specially trained tactical police officer. Even some of the most highly trained members of law enforcement see their shooting accuracy significantly decrease when engaged in gunfights. 8 Bernard D. Rostker et al., Evaluation of the New York City Police Department Firearm Training and Firearm-Discharge Review Process (Santa Monica: RAND Corporation, 2008), https://bit.ly/2U9bk0t .

The Risk of Gun Violence on Campus Increases

Allowing guns on campus would not prevent mass shootings and would actually increase the risk of gun violence. Research indicates that this policy would likely lead to more gun homicides and suicides, more nonfatal shootings, and more threats with a firearm on college campuses. 9 Daniel W. Webster et al., “Firearms on College Campuses.”

In fact, colleges and universities, which have traditionally prohibited guns on campus, are already relatively safe from gun violence. Among all violent crime against college students from 1995 through 2002, 93 percent of incidents took place off campus. 10 Katrina Baum and Patsy Klaus, “Violent Victimization of College Students, 1995-2002,” US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, January 2005, https://bit.ly/3orQ4iA . According to Everytown for Gun Safety’s tracking of incidents of gunfire on school grounds , an average of 10 gun homicides occur on college campuses each year, while almost 20 million students attend colleges or universities. 11 Analysis of Everytown for Gun Safety’s Gunfire on School Grounds in the United States database, total gun homicide victims, excluding the shooter, on the grounds of colleges or universities between 2015 and 2019. For more information visit https://everytownresearch.org/gunfire-in-school/ ; US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, “Digest of Education Statistics, 2019, Table 105.30: Enrollment in Elementary, Secondary, and Degree-Granting Postsecondary Institutions, by Level and Control of Institution: Selected Years, 1869-70 through Fall 2029,” December 2019, https://bit.ly/2LH5GR9 .

However, campus life is rife with other risk factors that make the presence of guns potentially dangerous. In a 2019 national survey, 62 percent of US college students reported drinking alcohol in the past month, 35 percent reported getting drunk, and 30 percent reported using illicit drugs. 12 John E. Schulenberg et al., Monitoring the Future: National Survey Results on Drug Use, 1975-2019: Volume II, College Students & Adults Ages 19-60 (Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan, 2020), https://bit.ly/3gSnLXV . Students who carried guns on campus were also more likely to report drinking heavily and more frequently, drinking and driving, and vandalizing property. 13 Matthew Miller, David Hemenway, and Henry Wechsler, “Guns and Gun Threats at College,” Journal of American College Health 51, no. 2 (2002): 57–65, https://doi.org/10.1080/07448480209596331 . Alcohol use is associated with increased aggression, impaired judgment about whether to shoot a gun, and worsened aim when firing. 14 Brad J. Bushman, “Effects of Alcohol on Human Aggression,” in Recent Developments in Alcoholism , eds. Marc Galanter et al. (Boston: Springer, 1997), 227–43, https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47141-8_13 ; Dominic J. Parrott and Christopher I. Eckhardt, “Effects of Alcohol on Human Aggression,” Current Opinion in Psychology 19 (February 2018): 1–5, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.03.023 ; Brendon G. Carr et al., “A Randomised Controlled Feasibility Trial of Alcohol Consumption and the Ability to Appropriately Use a Firearm,” Injury Prevention 15, no. 6 (December 1, 2009): 409–12, https://doi.org/10.1136/ip.2008.020768 .

Mental illness is a significant problem among college students. In another 2019 national survey, three out of five college students reported “overwhelming anxiety” in the past year, and two out of five “felt so depressed that it was difficult to function.” 15 American College Health Association, “National College Health Assessment II: Reference Group Executive Summary, Spring 2019” (Silver Spring, MD: American College  Health Association, 2019), https://bit.ly/3lJeu5e . Rates of suicidal ideation also doubled between the 2006-2007 and 2016-2017 school years. 16 Sarah Ketchen Lipson, Emily G. Lattie, and Daniel Eisenberg, “Increased Rates of Mental Health Service Utilization by US College Students: 10-Year Population-Level Trends (2007–2017),” Psychiatric Services 70, no. 1 (November 2018): 60–63, https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201800332 . With access to firearms tripling the risk of dying by suicide, the danger of allowing more guns on campus is clear. 17 Andrew Anglemyer, Tara Horvath, and George Rutherford, “The Accessibility of Firearms and Risk for Suicide and Homicide Victimization among Household Members: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Annals of Internal Medicine 160, no. 2 (January 2014): 101–10, https://doi.org/10.7326/M13-1301 .

States that allow guns at colleges and universities have seen students and staff alike suffer from negligent gun violence on campus . For example, in Idaho, just a few months after the passage of a 2014 law that forced Idaho colleges to allow individuals to carry guns on campus, a professor with a permit unintentionally shot himself in the leg during a chemistry lab. 18 Associated Press, “Idaho State University Teacher Accidentally Shoots Self in Class,” CBS News , September 4, 2014, http://every.tw/188lNOu . In 2016, a permit-holding student in Texas unintentionally discharged his gun in his dorm room just weeks after a guns-on-campus law went into effect. 19 Claire Cardona, “Tarleton State Student Accidentally Fires Gun in Campus Dorm,” Dallas Morning News , September 15, 2016, https://bit.ly/3mGzISB . In 2017, a Utah student with a concealed carry permit reached into his backpack and unintentionally fired his gun in a campus cafeteria, hitting a table and light fixture. It was the second incident of unintentional gunfire on the campus in two years. 20 Luke Ramseth, “UVU Student Accidentally Discharges Firearm near Campus Restaurants; No One Injured,” Salt Lake Tribune , April 26, 2017, http://bit.ly/2qj103T . In 2019, a Georgia student unintentionally shot and wounded himself in a campus lounge. 21 Gabriela Miranda, “UGA Community Debates Gun Law after Accidental Shooting on Campus,” The Red & Black , October 24, 2019, https://bit.ly/37pkknc .

See all gunfire on school grounds incidents in your state

Everytown for Gun Safety started tracking incidents of gunfire on school grounds in 2013 to gain a better understanding of how often children and teens are affected by gun violence at their schools and colleges.

Guns on Campus Lead to New Liabilities

States that have passed legislation forcing colleges to allow guns on campus are struggling to deal with the consequences. In Texas, where a guns-on-campus bill passed in 2015, 22 Texas SB 11 (2015). implementation has been extremely contentious. Prominent faculty members have left to take jobs in other states, and educators have withdrawn from consideration for jobs at Texas universities. 23 Molly Hennessy-Fiske, “New Law Allowing Concealed Guns on Campus Roils University of Texas,” Los Angeles Times , March 24, 2016, https://lat.ms/2Ih12YJ . Professors in both Texas and Georgia have brought lawsuits over guns-on-campus laws, 24 Matthew Watkins, “Three UT Professors Sue to Block Campus Carry,” Texas Tribune , July 6, 2016, https://bit.ly/36MJBsy ; Eric Stirgus, “Professors Ask Court to Overturn Georgia’s Campus Carry Law,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution , September 28, 2017, https://bit.ly/2We1Ocr. and although the suits were ultimately dismissed, they demonstrate the discontent faculty members feel when they are forced to teach on campuses that allow guns.

In addition to potential lawsuits and loss of faculty, guns on campus would burden colleges and state budgets with hefty costs. These laws result in new expenses to ensure campus safety, including additional police and security staff, metal detectors, cameras, and protective gear. In order to comply with a Kansas law that forces colleges to allow guns on campus and implement costly security measures at each building where guns are prohibited, three universities estimated that it would cost more than $2 million to secure their athletic facilities. 25 Maura Ewing, “New Campus Gun Laws Have Colleges Shopping for Metal Detectors. For Big Schools, the Bills Are Eye-Popping.,” The Trace , April 25, 2017, https://bit.ly/36KYA6f . When public universities in Florida evaluated the costs of guns on campus, one university estimated spending at least $1.1 million in the first year, 26 Scott Travis and Gabrielle Russon, “Campus-Carry Bills Come with Hefty Price Tag, Schools Say,” South Florida Sun-Sentinel , January 15, 2016, https://bit.ly/349ZgjR . and the state’s community colleges estimated they would need at least $74 million to prepare for the policy. 27 Kristen M. Clark, “Florida State Colleges to Ask Legislature for $74M to Enhance Campus Security,” Tampa Bay Times , December 17, 2015, https://bit.ly/2WhGIKf . In 2014, after Idaho passed legislation that forced colleges to allow people to carry guns on campus, five state schools had to request more than $3.7 million from the state to increase security in the first year alone. 28 “Concealed Carry Law Costs Idaho Colleges $3.7M,” Campus Safety Magazine , February 5, 2015, https://bit.ly/3orOME9 . And in West Virginia, a 2019 guns-on-campus bill proposed in 2019 was estimated to cost more than $11 million dollars to implement. 29 West Virginia Legislature, HB2519 Fiscal Note, February 7, 2019 https://bit.ly/3mAiLJB .

Key Stakeholders Oppose Guns on Campus

Among students, there is widespread opposition to guns on campus. According to a wide swath of surveys conducted as recently as 2018, the majority of students across multiple college campuses oppose allowing guns on campus, 30 Matthew R. Hassett, Bitna Kim, and Chunghyeon Seo, “Attitudes toward Concealed Carry of Firearms on Campus: A Systematic Review of the Literature,” Journal of School Violence 19, no. 1 (2020): 48–61, https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2019.1703717 . and legislation to force guns on campus has prompted protests by students. 31 Charles Boothe, “Right to Protest: Students from across State Plan March against Campus Carry Bill,” Bluefield Daily Telegraph , March 3, 2019, https://bit.ly/33DSQZR ; Conor Griffith, “WVU Students Protest against Campus Carry Bill,” Morgantown News , February 21, 2019, https://bit.ly/36xxYW8 ; Hilary Butschek, “UGA Students, Professors Protest ‘Campus Carry’ Bill, Demand Gun-Free Campus,” Florida Times-Union , March 17, 2016, https://bit.ly/36vMxcD ; Dave Philipps, “University of Texas Students Find the Absurd in a New Gun Law,” New York Times , August 24, 2016, https://nyti.ms/2LcWZOf . Students have also expressed concern about how these laws could affect their specific communities. For example, LGBTQ students fear they would no longer be able to safely express themselves with guns allowed on campus. 32 Ema O’Connor, “Texas LGBT Students Say They Don’t Feel Safe Now That People Can Carry Guns on Campus,” BuzzFeed News , August 29, 2016, https://bit.ly/3lL6j8G . Students at Historically Black Colleges and Universities worry about heightened danger from law enforcement around students who are potentially armed, noting that they regularly face intimidation and threatening interactions with law enforcement on campus. 33 Ema O’Connor, “Texas HBCU Students Worry More about Police Now That Guns Are Allowed on Campus,” BuzzFeed News , September 1, 2016, https://bit.ly/3qs4mBD .

These concerns are shared by other groups at colleges and universities. A 2018 study found that, on average, all kinds of members of the campus community—including those who own guns to protect themselves—believed that allowing concealed carry on campus would damage a school’s academic environment and potentially escalate contentious situations. 34 James A. Shepperd et al., “The Anticipated Consequences of Legalizing Guns on College Campuses,” Journal of Threat Assessment and Management 5, no. 1 (March 2018): 21–34, https://doi.org/10.1037/tam0000097 . In surveys conducted in 2012 and 2013, 95 percent of college presidents and 94 percent of college faculty indicated they opposed concealed carry on campus. 35 James H. Price et al., “University Presidents’ Perceptions and Practice Regarding the Carrying of Concealed Handguns on College Campuses,” Journal of American College Health 62, no. 7 (October 3, 2014): 461–69, https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2014.920336 . Additionally, a 2014 survey of university police and security found that nearly three in four opposed students having firearms on campus. 36 Robin Hattersley-Gray, “Study Shows Most College and K-12 Protection Personnel Oppose Concealed Carry on Campus,” Campus Safety Magazine , December 11, 2014, https://bit.ly/37mEMq8 .

Everytown Research & Policy is a program of Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, an independent, non-partisan organization dedicated to understanding and reducing gun violence. Everytown Research & Policy works to do so by conducting methodologically rigorous research, supporting evidence-based policies, and communicating this knowledge to the American public.

Freedom from Fear of Hate-Fueled Violence: Preventing Transgender Homicides

The statistics make it clear: violence against transgender people is a gun violence issue.

Those Who Serve: Addressing Firearm Suicide Among Military Veterans

Repeal gun industry immunity, new data, same conclusion: smart gun laws save lives.

Everytown's Gun Law Rankings show a clear correlation between states with strong gun laws and lower rates of gun violence.

Did you know?

Every day, more than 120 people in the United States are killed with guns, twice as many are shot and wounded and countless others are impacted by acts of gun violence.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. WONDER Online Database, Underlying Cause of Death. A yearly average was developed using four years of the most recent available data: 2018 to 2021.

Last updated: 2.13.2023

16 Controversial State Gun Laws And Bans That Sparked Major Debate

Posted: April 13, 2024 | Last updated: April 13, 2024

Across the United States, state legislatures are fiercely debating and enacting a variety of gun laws, reflecting the nation’s deeply divided stance on gun control and Second Amendment rights. From permitless carry to sweeping assault weapons bans, these laws are at the heart of contentious political and public safety discussions.

Each legislation brings to light the complex balance between ensuring public safety and upholding constitutional rights, sparking legal battles and public outcry. Here’s a look at some of the most controversial state gun laws that have recently made headlines, illustrating the varied landscape of American gun legislation.

Permitless Carry in Florida

Florida’s recent legislation allows adults to carry concealed firearms without a license or training, joining over half the states in the country adopting permitless carry. This law raises debates about public safety and the balance between Second Amendment rights and gun control efforts. Critics argue it may lead to increased violence, while proponents see it as a victory for gun rights​.

Tennessee Assault Weapons Ban

Tennessee proposed bills to prohibit the sale or purchase of assault weapons, reflecting a growing trend among states to regulate firearms more strictly. This move has sparked discussions on the effectiveness of such bans in preventing gun violence versus the infringement on gun ownership rights.

Washington State Assault Weapons Ban

Washington enacted a comprehensive assault weapons ban, which includes restrictions on a wide range of firearms and features. The law faces several legal challenges, highlighting the tension between state-level initiatives to control gun violence and the rights of gun owners​.

Missouri’s Second Amendment Preservation Act

Missouri’s law aimed to invalidate federal gun laws within the state and penalize law enforcement agencies enforcing such laws. The U.S. Supreme Court’s refusal to reinstate the law after a lower court ruled it unconstitutional underscores the complex interaction between state and federal jurisdictions over gun control​.

Illinois Assault Weapons Ban

Illinois’ ban on a broad range of semi-automatic firearms and features marks one of the most sweeping state-level gun control measures. The law’s constitutionality was upheld by the state supreme court, despite numerous legal challenges. This legislation exemplifies the deep divisions over gun control in America.

Arkansas Redefines Loaded Firearm and Enacts Permitless Carry

Arkansas amended its definition of a loaded firearm, potentially affecting gun safety and use regulations. Additionally, the state’s enactment of permitless carry continues the national trend towards less restrictive gun carrying laws​.

Connecticut’s Ghost Gun Ban

Connecticut’s legislation against ghost guns, which are firearms without serial numbers, aims to curb the untraceable nature of these weapons. The law reflects growing concerns over the difficulty of tracking and regulating these firearms.

New York’s Concealed Carry Restrictions

New York tightened rules on concealed carry, specifying where firearms can be carried and increasing permit requirements. This law was a response to the Supreme Court ruling on public carry rights and has been controversial among gun rights advocates.

California’s Microstamping Requirement

California requires new handguns to have microstamping technology, which imprints a unique code on cartridge cases when fired. This law aims to help solve gun-related crimes but has been criticized for its technological and practical feasibility.

New Jersey’s Magazine Capacity Limit

New Jersey limits the magazine capacity for firearms, a measure intended to reduce the lethality of mass shootings. The law’s opponents argue it infringes on gun owners’ rights and effectiveness in preventing crime.

Maryland’s Red Flag Law

Maryland allows for the temporary removal of firearms from individuals deemed a danger to themselves or others. While aimed at preventing gun violence, critics argue it may infringe on due process and Second Amendment rights.

Colorado’s Background Checks for Private Sales

Colorado requires background checks for all gun sales, including private transactions. This law seeks to close loopholes in gun sales but has faced opposition over concerns of enforceability and privacy.

Oregon’s Safe Storage Law

Oregon mandates that guns be securely stored and inaccessible to minors, aiming to prevent accidental shootings and suicides. The law highlights the balance between gun safety and individuals’ rights to self-defense.

Virginia’s One-Handgun-a-Month Law

Virginia reinstated its law limiting handgun purchases to one per month for most citizens, aiming to reduce gun trafficking. This measure has been contested as a restriction on the lawful purchase of firearms.

Rhode Island’s Assault Weapons Ban Proposal

Rhode Island proposed a ban on the possession, sale, and transfer of assault weapons, with legislation introduced in February 2023. This measure highlights the state’s effort to address gun violence through restrictive gun ownership laws, reflecting a broader national debate on the balance between public safety and Second Amendment rights.

Louisiana’s Attempt at Constitutional Carry

Louisiana considered a bill for constitutional carry, allowing residents to carry concealed weapons without a license. Although the bill made progress in the legislature, it was ultimately deferred due to amendments that the bill’s sponsor did not support, showcasing the complex dynamics and varied opinions within states on gun control and rights.

The landscape of gun legislation in the United States is a testament to the ongoing debate between safeguarding public safety and protecting constitutional freedoms. These controversial laws, varying widely from state to state, underscore the complexities and challenges of addressing gun violence while respecting individual rights.

As legal challenges continue and public opinion shifts, these laws may evolve, reflecting broader societal changes and the ongoing American discourse on gun control and rights. The future of gun legislation will undoubtedly remain a pivotal issue, requiring careful consideration of both safety and liberty.

What To Read Next

• This Genius Trick Every Online Shopper Should Know
• Best High-Yield Savings Accounts This Month
• Best Gold IRA This Year
• Deals On Popular Cruises
• The Best Internet Deals For Seniors
• Affordable Life Insurance Options for Seniors

For the Latest Breaking Crime & Justice News, Headlines & Videos, head to Body Cams+

More for You

King and Queen ‘utterly shocked and horrified’ by ‘senseless attack’ in Sydney

‘I haven’t seen something like that in the skies here’ Robertson reports from Jerusalem

24 Phrases and Words That Make You Sound Stupid

Masters fashion: Day was asked by Augusta National to change his wardrobe so 'respectfully' he did

Ryan Gosling, 'SNL' Cast Barely Keep It Together In 'Beavis And Butt-Head' Sketch

Park Bo-ram Dies: K-pop Singer Was 30, Circumstances Under Investigation

Michael Cooper shares wife's uncanny suggestion of making Larry Bird his HOF presenter: "When it is all over with, we're all human"

Scientists create 30% stronger concrete using this common household organic waste: ‘A rare double-win’

“Nosferatu” summons chilling first footage of vampire Bill Skarsgård

Biden releases statement after Netanyahu phone call

Why You Should Be Putting Paper Towels in the Fridge

Excellent used cars to buy today from just $1500

"I'm sorry if you sign this contract, you have to play pro ball" - How Kobe Bryant tried to find a way to go to college even after signing an endorsement deal in 1996

Giant battery to be installed underground as deep as Empire State Building is tall: 'It's a massive amount of storage'

Five college towns worth staying put in after graduation

Boeing’s CEO search has a new frontrunner—and insiders say it could mean a radical change for the $104 billion ailing planemaker

Ryan Gosling and Kate McKinnon's ‘Close Encounter' Sketch Sends ‘SNL' Cold Open Into Hysterics

10 Bad DIY Habits You Need to Stop Doing Immediately

Popular media company files for bankruptcy, plans to liquidate

25 Large Dog Breeds That Make Great Pets

Gun Laws by State Map - Gun Laws by State

Gun laws by state map, visualize gun laws with our interactive map. navigate through each state's laws with ease and understand the legal landscape., popular articles, share gun laws by state, login to gun laws by state.

Find anything you save across the site in your account

Stephen Breyer to the Supreme Court Majority: You’re Doing It Wrong

By Louis Menand

One day in 1993, Stephen Breyer , then the chief judge of the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, which sits in Boston, was riding his bicycle in Harvard Square when he was hit by a car. He was taken to Mount Auburn Hospital with broken ribs and a punctured lung. While he was recovering, he was visited by three White House officials. They had flown up to interview him for a possible nomination to the United States Supreme Court.

The vetting went well enough, and Breyer was invited to Washington to meet the President, Bill Clinton . Breyer’s doctors advised against flying, so he took the train, in some discomfort. The meeting with Clinton did not go well. According to Jeffrey Toobin’s “ The Nine ,” a book about the Supreme Court, Clinton found Breyer “heartless.” “I don’t see enough humanity,” he complained. “I want a judge with soul.” Breyer was told to go home. They would call.

He knew that things had gone poorly. “There’s only two people who aren’t convinced I’m going to be on the Supreme Court,” he told a fellow-judge. “One is me and the other is Clinton.” He was right. The phone never rang. The seat went to Ruth Bader Ginsburg .

Discover notable new fiction and nonfiction.

Ginsburg was a cool customer, too, but she knew which buttons to push. In her interview with Clinton, she talked about the death of her mother and about helping her husband get through law school after he was stricken with testicular cancer. Clinton loved catch-in-the-throat stories like that. Ginsburg was confirmed by the Senate 96–3.

A year went by, there was another Supreme Court vacancy, and Breyer was again in the mix. His candidacy was pushed by Ted Kennedy, with whom he had worked as the chief counsel of the Senate Judiciary Committee when Kennedy was its chair. Clinton really wanted to nominate his Secretary of the Interior, Bruce Babbitt, but Babbitt faced opposition from senators in Western states, and Breyer seemed politically hypoallergenic.

So Breyer was chosen. Still, the White House did not do him any favors. Clinton’s indecisiveness was an ongoing story in the press—it had taken him eighty-six days to pick Ginsburg—and the news coverage made it plain that Breyer was not his first or even his second choice. The White House counsel, Lloyd Cutler, told reporters that, of the candidates being considered, Breyer was “the one with the fewest problems.”

Clinton announced the selection without even waiting for Breyer to come down from Boston. When Breyer did show up, a few days later, he said, “I’m glad I didn’t bring my bicycle down.” Famous last words. In 2011, he broke his collarbone in another biking accident near his home in Cambridge, and in 2013 he fractured his right shoulder and underwent shoulder-replacement surgery after crashing his bicycle near the Korean War Veterans Memorial, on the National Mall. He was seventy-four. You have to give him credit. He gets right back on the horse.

Since his appointment to the Court, Breyer has published several books on his jurisprudential views. His latest is “ Reading the Constitution: Why I Chose Pragmatism, Not Textualism ” (Simon & Schuster). It sums up his frustration with the court that he just stepped down from.

Clinton was not the only person who read Breyer as a technocrat. People felt he lacked a quality that Clinton could apparently summon at will—empathy. “He’s always been smarter than most of those around him,” the Yale constitutional-law professor Akhil Amar explained to a reporter, “so he’s had to learn how to get along with other people.”

That was his reputation at Harvard Law School, too, where he taught administrative law for many years before becoming a judge. “Breyer’s basic social instincts are conservative,” a Harvard colleague, Morton Horwitz, told the Times . “His legal culture is more liberal, and his very flexible pragmatism will enable him to give things a gentle spin in a liberal direction. But he’s a person without deep roots of any kind. He won’t develop a vision. . . . The words ‘social justice’ would somewhat embarrass him.”

It’s true that Breyer has a professorial presentation. He is cosmopolitan and erudite. He travels to other countries and is interested in their legal systems; reporters like to drop the fact that he has read “À la Recherche du Temps Perdu,” in French, twice. He is also, for a judge, relatively wealthy. His wife, Joanna Hare, a clinical psychologist at Dana-Farber, is the daughter of an English viscount.

Before joining the Court, Breyer showed few signs of being a social-justice warrior. He has, like the President who appointed him, neoliberal inclinations. He was instrumental in creating sentencing guidelines for federal judges that he later conceded were too rigid. He wrote a book on regulatory reform. And one of his proudest legislative achievements was working with Kennedy to deregulate the airline industry.

But he has an admirable temperament. Toobin called him “the sunniest individual to serve on the Supreme Court in a great many years.” Seated on a bench next to a lot of intellectual loners— Antonin Scalia , Clarence Thomas , David Souter , Ginsburg herself—Breyer became a consensus seeker, if not always a consensus builder. He believed in reasoned discourse.

He had also learned, from watching Kennedy do business in the Senate, that compromise is how you get things done in government, and he understood that on an ideologically divided court the power is in the middle. Being a split-the-difference centrist, like his predecessor Lewis Powell, and like the Justice he was closest to, Sandra Day O’Connor , suited his personality, too.

Breyer loved the job and was reluctant to announce his retirement, throwing liberals who feared another R.B.G. fiasco into a panic. He stepped down at the end of the 2021-22 term, in time for President Joe Biden to put one of Breyer’s former clerks, Ketanji Brown Jackson , on the Court. Breyer is now back where he started, as a professor of administrative law at Harvard. Happily for the law school, there are now many dedicated bike lanes in Cambridge.

Horwitz was not entirely right about what George H. W. Bush called “the vision thing.” Beneath Breyer’s pragmatic, let-us-reason-together persona is the soul of a Warren Court liberal. The Warren Court is where Breyer’s judicial career began. After graduating from Harvard Law School, in 1964, he clerked for Justice Arthur Goldberg. It was, he said, “a court with a mission.” The mission was to realize the promise of Brown v. Board of Education.

Brown is Breyer’s touchstone. He calls the decision “an affirmation of justice itself.” Brown was decided in 1954, and it governs only segregation in public schools. This is because the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of “the equal protection of the laws,” the right under which Brown was decided, is a right that can be exercised only against states and their agencies. But Breyer understands Brown in a broader sense. He believes that the reasoning in Brown leads to the condemnation of any and all discrimination that is within the reach of government to eliminate.

Extending the spirit of Brown is what the 1964 Civil Rights Act was designed to do. The act was signed into law in July, just as Breyer was beginning his clerkship, and it did something that Congress had tried once before, in 1875: make it unlawful for public accommodations like hotels, theatres, and restaurants to discriminate on the basis of race. In 1883, in a blockbuster decision, the Supreme Court had thrown out that earlier act as unconstitutional. It ruled that the government cannot tell private parties whom they must serve.

Title II of the Civil Rights Act once again prohibited discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin. But how are privately owned businesses like restaurants within the reach of the state? In October, 1964, three months after the act was signed into law, that question came before the Court in two challenges to the constitutionality of Title II: Heart of Atlanta Motel v. U.S., concerning a motel in Georgia that refused to serve Black travellers, and Katzenbach v. McClung, concerning a restaurant in Birmingham, Ollie’s Barbecue, that refused to seat Black customers. (They could use a takeout window.)

The Court ruled that Congress gets its power to ban discrimination in public accommodations from the commerce clause in Article I of the Constitution. (“Congress shall have power . . . to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.”) This holding required the Court to find that the Heart of Atlanta Motel and Ollie’s Barbecue were, in fact, part of interstate commerce. And the Court so found.

Since the motel was patronized by people travelling from one state to another, and since the ingredients for some of the food served at Ollie’s came from outside Alabama, the Court held that the motel and the restaurant were part of commerce “among the several states” and therefore within the power of Congress to regulate. The Court declared the 1883 ruling “inapposite and without precedential value,” and the decision in both cases was unanimous. Breyer thinks that they were the most important rulings of his clerkship.

There was another case with far-reaching effects that was decided during Breyer’s clerkship: Griswold v. Connecticut. The plaintiffs, Estelle Griswold and C. Lee Buxton, opened a Planned Parenthood clinic in New Haven and were arrested for counselling married couples about birth-control devices, which were illegal under the state’s anti-contraception law. Griswold and Buxton argued that, since the law was unconstitutional, they could not be prosecuted for advising women to break it. In a 7–2 decision, the Court agreed. What constitutional provision did the Connecticut law violate? The right to privacy.

Justice William O. Douglas wrote the opinion of the Court, and it is a classic of judicial inventiveness. Nowhere does the Constitution mention a right to privacy, but Douglas proposed that “specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance.” By this jurisprudential alchemy, the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments could be interpreted as defining a “zone of privacy” whose penumbra would extend to the marital bedroom.

Douglas concluded his opinion with an encomium to marriage. He got quite worked up about it. “Marriage is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred,” he wrote. “It is an association that promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects. Yet it is an association for as noble a purpose as any involved in our prior decisions.” Douglas was sixty-six. A year after Griswold, he divorced his twenty-six-year-old third wife, Joan Martin, to marry Cathleen Heffernan, who was twenty-two.

Griswold became a key precedent in two landmark cases: Roe v. Wade, decided in 1973, and Obergefell v. Hodges, the same-sex-marriage case, decided in 2015. “The right of privacy,” Harry Blackmun wrote for the Court in Roe, “is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.” In Obergefell, Anthony Kennedy, also writing for the Court, quoted Douglas’s reflections on marriage in their entirety and added some emanations of his own. In addition to a privacy right, he declared, constitutional liberties extend “to certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy, including intimate choices that define personal identity and beliefs.” (In a dissent, Scalia said that he would “hide my head in a bag” before putting his name to some of Kennedy’s prose.)

The shape of Breyer’s Supreme Court career therefore has an emblematic significance, because it was bookended by two decisions that undid much of what the Warren Court achieved in Heart of Atlanta and Griswold. Breyer’s first major dissent came in 1995, in U.S. v. Lopez, a commerce-clause case; his last was in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Organization, the decision that overturned Roe v. Wade .

Lopez turned on the constitutionality of the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, which made it a federal crime to possess a firearm in a school zone. In a 5–4 decision, the Court rejected the government’s argument that the act was a legitimate exercise of Congress’s power under the commerce clause. It was the first time since 1936 that the Court had struck down a federal law for exceeding the commerce-clause power.

Much of the New Deal was made possible by the commerce clause. In his dissent, Breyer noted that more than a hundred federal laws include the phrase “affecting commerce.” How many was the Court bent on invalidating? Some, anyway. Five years later, in U.S. v. Morrison, the Court threw out provisions of the Violence Against Women Act on the ground of commerce-clause overreach.

Breyer’s dissent in Dobbs, in 2022, was joined by Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor . The privacy right in Roe “does not stand alone,” they wrote. “The Court has linked it for decades to other settled freedoms involving bodily integrity, familial relationships, and procreation. Most obviously, the right to terminate a pregnancy arose straight out of the right to purchase and use contraception. . . . They are all part of the same constitutional fabric.” They wondered, again, how much the Court was prepared to unravel. In his concurrence, Thomas suggested that the Court might want to reconsider Griswold and Obergefell.

Link copied

What happened? Breyer has an explanation, and he lays it out in the new book. He thinks it’s all a matter of interpretation.

As Breyer points out, a majority of the Court now subscribes to the interpretive methods known as textualism and originalism. Textualism and originalism tend to be run together as types of what used to be called “strict construction” (a term that seems to have fallen out of use). But there is a difference. Textualism is primarily a way of interpreting statutes, and originalism is a way of interpreting the Constitution.

Textualists ask what the words of a statute literally mean. Information like legislative history or social-science data is largely irrelevant. Textualists don’t ask, “What would Congress have us do?” They just say, “What is the rule here?” and try to follow it.

Originalists, on the other hand, ask what the Framers would have them do. Originalists can consult the records of the Constitutional Convention (which are hardly comprehensive) and documents like the Federalist Papers (which is a collection of op-eds). But they claim to stick to the “original public understanding” of constitutional language—that is, what the words meant to the average voter in the eighteenth century. They do not invent rights that the Framers would not have recognized, as originalists think Douglas did in Griswold.

More recently, originalists have looked to something called “history and tradition,” highly malleable terms—whose history? which tradition?—by which they tend to mean things as they were prior to circa 1964. Writing for the Court in Dobbs, Samuel Alito explained that the decision turned on “whether the right at issue in this case is rooted in our Nation’s history and tradition.” The constitutional right to abortion was then fifty years old. For women likely to rely on it, the right had existed for their entire lifetimes. But what mattered to the originalists was whether women could rely on it in the nineteenth century.

The use of race as a plus factor in college and university admissions is even older. The practice dates from the late nineteen-sixties, and has been ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court three times: in 1978, in 2003, and in 2016. But the majority had little trouble wiping it out last term, in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard . It is a bit brazen to be shouldering aside precedents under the banner of “tradition.”

Breyer sums up textualism and originalism as attempts to make judicial reasoning a science and to make law a list of rules. In our system of government, the Constitution is the big trump card. But it doesn’t come with a user manual. The document is basically a list of clauses—the commerce clause (sixteen words), the equal-protection clause (fourteen words), and so on. And the Constitution gives the reason for a clause only twice: in the patent-and-copyright clause in Article I and in the right-to-bear-arms clause in the Second Amendment. (We could add the preamble, the “We the People” clause, which gives the rationale for having a written constitution in the first place, a novel idea in 1787.)

Some constitutional clauses, like the requirement that the President be native-born, are rules, but many, like the equal-protection clause (the only reference to equality in the entire document), are principles. They do not mark out bright lines separating the constitutionally permitted from the constitutionally forbidden.

Courts, however, are obliged to draw those lines. Judges cannot conclude that the law is a gray area. Textualists and originalists believe that their approach draws the line at the right place. Breyer thinks that the idea that there is a single right place, good for all time, is a delusion, and that his approach, which he calls “pragmatism,” is the one best suited to the design of the American legal system. Pragmatism makes the system “workable” (a word Breyer uses many times) because it does not box us into rigid doctrines and anachronistic meanings.

Pragmatist judges therefore look to the law’s purposes, consequences, and values. They ask, “Why did the lawmakers write this? What are the real-world consequences for the way the Court interprets it? And what are the values that subtend the system of government that courts are a part of?” These are questions that literal readings can’t answer.

An originalist like Scalia, for example, thinks that the “cruel and unusual punishment” clause in the Eighth Amendment makes unconstitutional only punishments that would have been considered cruel and unusual in 1791, the year the amendment was ratified. In 1791, people were sentenced to death for theft. If we said that seems cruel and unusual today, Scalia would say, “Fine. Pass a law against it. But the Constitution does not forbid it.” When he was asked what punishment the Framers would have considered cruel and unusual, Scalia said, “Thumbscrews.”

To this, a pragmatist judge would say, “Then what is the point of having a constitution?” The words “cruel and unusual” were chosen by the Framers (in this case, James Madison, who drafted the Bill of Rights) because their meanings are not fixed. And that goes to the purpose of the clause. The Constitution does not prohibit cruel and unusual punishment because cruelty is bad and we’re against it. It prohibits punishment that most people would find excessive in order to preserve the public’s faith in the criminal-justice system. If we started executing people for stealing a loaf of bread today, the system would lose its legitimacy. Surely an originalist would agree that the Framers were big on legitimacy.

The same is true of many other clauses—for example, the free-speech clause in the First Amendment. Free speech is protected not because it’s a God-given right. It’s protected because, in a democracy, if you do not allow the losers to have their say, you cannot expect them to submit to the will of the winners. Free speech legitimizes majoritarian rule.

Breyer’s book is organized as a series of analyses of some twenty Supreme Court cases, most of which Breyer took part in during his time on the Court. Some are major cases, like District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the originalists found a right to possess a gun for self-defense in the Second Amendment, which says nothing about self-defense. (“Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the eighteenth century are protected by the Second Amendment,” Scalia wrote in the Court’s opinion. Hmm. What happened to the Thumbscrews Doctrine?)

Other cases are perhaps less than major, like Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, which answered the question of whether the federal government is a “person” capable of petitioning the Patent Trial and Appeal Board under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. (It is not.) Breyer explains how originalists and textualists decided each case and how he, as a pragmatist, decided them. His book is accessible, rather repetitive, and neither theoretical nor technical. It is addressed to non-lawyers.

It also seems weirdly naïve. Or maybe purposefully naïve. In most of the cases Breyer discusses, where there was disagreement on the Court it resulted not from differences in interpretive methods but from differences in politics. In almost every case, the originalists and textualists came down on the conservative side, restricting the powers of the federal government and expanding the powers of the states, and the pragmatists and “living constitutionalists” (another term that’s now largely avoided) came down on the liberal side.

What is naïve is to believe that the conservative Justices—which means, on the current Court, the six Justices appointed by Republican Presidents, though they are not always on the same page—would decide cases differently if they switched to another method of interpretation. Judicial reasoning doesn’t work that way. Judges pretty much know where they want to come out, and then they figure out a juridically respectable way of getting there.

Why would Breyer want to ignore, or seriously understate, the part that political ideology plays in Supreme Court decisions? The answer lies in an earlier book, “ The Authority of the Court and the Peril of Politics ,” based on a lecture he delivered at Harvard in 2021. It’s all about legitimacy.

Legitimacy is why the Warren Court was on a mission in 1964. The Supreme Court’s reputation—you could say its mystique—is all that it has. It cannot tax or spend. Only Congress can do those things, and only the President can send in the Army. When Southern school districts ignored Brown and refused to integrate, the Court was in danger of being exposed as a paper tiger. It was crucial, therefore, that everyone believe that the Justices were not making law, only finding it. The Constitution made them do it. That was the Court’s claim to legitimacy.

Breyer thinks that the Court still operates this way. All Justices, he says in “The Authority of the Court,” “studiously try to avoid deciding a case on the basis of ideology rather than law.” The reason that “different political groups so strongly support some persons for appointment to the Court and so strongly oppose others” is that people “confuse perceived personal ideology (inferred from party affiliation or that of the nominating executive) and professed judicial philosophy.”

But Presidents and Senate majorities certainly think they are appointing Justices who share their political beliefs, even when they profess to be simply looking for the most qualified jurist. Sometimes Presidents are wrong. Earl Warren, appointed by Dwight D. Eisenhower, no enthusiast of race-mixing, is a famous example. But that is not because Warren was apolitical. Warren was a Republican politician. He had been elected governor of California three times and had run for Vice-President on the ticket with Thomas E. Dewey, in 1948. For Warren, the political constituency that mattered when he became Chief Justice was not the President or Congress. It was the public.

He could see that, in the postwar era, public opinion was likely to favor expanded liberties—the United States was presenting itself, after all, as the leader of the free world—and although his court may sometimes have got a few paces ahead of public opinion, it was largely in step with the times. It was a liberal era. We are not living in a liberal era anymore, and the Court reflects this.

Politics is the art of governance. The Supreme Court is a branch of government, and is therefore a political body. Its decisions affect public life. If by “political” we mean “partisan,” we are still talking about governance, because partisanship is loyalty to a political ideology, normally instantiated in a political party. Politics, therefore, cannot not be partisan. Partisanship is how politics works. Even when politicians say, “This is no time for politics,” they are saying it for partisan reasons. They are saying it because it is good for their side to say it.

What makes the Court different from other political actors is stare decisis, the tradition of respecting its earlier decisions, something Congress does not have to worry about. There is no rule against overturning a precedent, though. So why has the Court been traditionally reluctant to do so? Why does Thomas’s suggestion that it might be time to overrule Griswold and Obergefell seem so radical? It’s because the Court’s legitimacy is intimately tied to the perception that, in making its rulings, it looks only to what the Constitution says and what the Court has previously decided. When the Court overturns a case, it has to make it appear as though the decision was wrong as a matter of law.

This is why Breyer insists that it’s all a matter of legal forensics, of what interpretive lenses the Justices use. He wants to preserve the authority of the Court. He wants to prevent the Justices from being seen as the puppets of politicians.

His toughest moment on the Court, for this reason, must have been Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District, decided in 2007. In that case, the Court struck down a Seattle policy of using race as a factor in assigning students to high schools with the aim of attaining rough racial balance.

It was the kind of policy that the Court had approved a number of times since Brown. Now, in an opinion by John Roberts, the Court declared that it had had enough. Roberts ended with a memorable line, no doubt saved up for the right occasion: “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”

After Roberts announced the Court’s opinion, on the last day of the term, Breyer delivered a speech from the bench. “Bristling with barely concealed anger,” according to an account by the legal scholar Lani Guinier, he accused the Court’s Republican appointees of voting their policy preferences. “It is not often in the law that so few have so quickly changed so much,” he said.

In 2019, Breyer’s speech from the bench was published as a pamphlet by Brookings. The title he gave it was “Breaking the Promise of Brown.” ♦

New Yorker Favorites

Why facts don’t change our minds .

The tricks rich people use to avoid taxes .

The man who spent forty-two years at the Beverly Hills Hotel pool .

How did polyamory get so popular ?

The ghostwriter who regrets working for Donald Trump .

Snoozers are, in fact, losers .

Fiction by Jamaica Kincaid: “Girl”

Sign up for our daily newsletter to receive the best stories from The New Yorker .

Books & Fiction

By signing up, you agree to our User Agreement and Privacy Policy & Cookie Statement . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

By Amy Davidson Sorkin

By David D. Kirkpatrick

By Stephania Taladrid

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Gun Control — Gun Control Thesis Statement

Gun Control Thesis Statement

• Categories: Gun Control

About this sample

Words: 1300 |

Published: Mar 19, 2024

Words: 1300 | Pages: 3 | 7 min read

Table of contents

I. introduction, ii. the second amendment and the right to bear arms, iii. gun violence statistics and the need for stricter regulations, iv. gun control policies and their effectiveness, v. mental health and gun violence, vi. gun control advocacy and opposition, vii. conclusion, a. overview of current gun control laws in the united states, b. analysis of the effectiveness of background checks and waiting periods, c. discussion of the impact of assault weapons bans and high-capacity magazine restrictions, a. connection between mental illness and gun violence, b. importance of mental health screenings for gun owners, c. strategies for preventing individuals with mental health issues from obtaining guns, a. overview of gun control advocacy groups, b. analysis of arguments against stricter gun control laws, c. strategies for promoting bipartisan support for gun control legislation, a. recap of key points, b. restate thesis statement, c. call to action for stricter gun control measures to improve public safety.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr Jacklynne

Verified writer

• Expert in: Social Issues

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

4 pages / 1890 words

8 pages / 3512 words

3 pages / 1320 words

2 pages / 1011 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Gun Control

Gun control has been a hotly debated topic in today's society, with proponents arguing for stricter regulations to reduce gun violence, while opponents advocate for the protection of Second Amendment rights. In this essay, I [...]

Gun control has been a highly debated topic in the United States for many years, especially in light of the increasing rates of gun violence. Understanding the complexities of this issue requires a comparative analysis of gun [...]

The debate over gun control in the United States has been a long-standing and contentious issue. One argument often put forth is that stricter gun control laws can lead to reduced crime rates. This essay will critically examine [...]

First off let's start off with why the Left (Democrats, Progressives, Socialists, Communists) want to have very strict and or common sense gun laws. The Left wants gun laws because they think gun laws actually work they think [...]

The United States is home to approximately 5% of the world’s population and 31% of all mass shootings. In these shootings and various other methods of gun violence, thousands of people die every year. Gun-related deaths are [...]

Definition of gun control and its significance Mention of the Second Amendment and the debate over gun ownership Comparison of gun control policies in different countries (Australia, UK) Discussion of [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free