Do you hear that shot being fired? That is the sound of an innocent life being laid to waste. Do you hear those sirens? That is the signal of a gun-related crime taking place. Did you see it on the news? Read it in the paper? A ten-year-old girl is dead. Why? Because of criminals wielding guns. There are multiple sides to every story. As a teen and citizen of the United States, I feel as if the controversy on gun control impacts everyone directly, and for that reason I will firmly remain with my decision to support gun control laws.

Based on reports that have been analyzed in “A Timeline of National Shootings In The U.S. Since Columbine,” since 1999, which included the shooting of the Columbine High School, to the Sandy Hook shooting in 2012, there have been 30 mass shootings recorded (Shen). Along with this data, the United States has rates of gun-related deaths 19.1 times higher than those of countries with similar high-income rates (Shen). During the adolescent years of Arne Duncan, the United State’s current Secretary of Education, many role models were lost to children of young age, as most teens were often killed by rampaging criminals with guns; during that time children in Chicago were buried every two weeks. He further told news reporters that in one day, 282 citizens will be shot, eighty will have been killed, and fifty of those killed will be children.  Currently, the main problem America faces is allowing the government to idly sit by while children pay the price of lax gun laws. The cost? Their lives.

Gun control laws reduce crime rates, which in turn lessens the excess amount of needless deaths of both children and adults. A 1991 study showed that after gun-control laws took effect in Washington D.C., their homicide rates went down 25%, and suicide rates using the same method of weapon also went down 23% (Liptak). As long as these types of laws remain in place, other states will most likely have similar results. Another factor that gun control laws play a huge role in is the amount of households that contain guns. Certain types of laws can reduce the number of households which hold the deadly device. The United States of America is shown to have tremendously high rates of gun ownership. As quoted from an email written by Nicholas Johnson, a Fordham law professor, “‘Our culture of armed civilians is unparalleled in the history of the world... According to the high estimate, there is a gun in every other American home’” (Liptak). If the amount of gun ownership was reduced to even a gun being in every three homes, the murder rate would fall dramatically. According to  Adam Liptak, “The murder rate in the United States, in any event, is higher yet — 5.7 per 100,000 people” (Liptak). The correlation between the expanse of gun-related deaths and the statistics for how many guns can be found in American homes is obvious. Reduce the multitude of guns and you essentially reduce the murder rate.
With these gun control laws being put into place, citizens will feel a sense of security as more background checks will occur, substantially diminishing the number of disturbed individuals who have not sought out proper treatment to buy and use guns. Sadly, it’s thanks to the Sandy Hook shooting, as well as the Columbine mass shooting and many more that led up to today’s many massacres, that the American government has decided to create gun control reforms in the states, most of those dealing with high-quality background checks. It’s also thanks to these background checks that thousands of citizens have been blocked from purchasing guns. NCIS has repeatedly stopped a numerous amount of mentally ill people from buying guns. This statement reflects on how the implant of gun-control laws in the states has reduced the number of mentally ill individuals getting their hands on guns has reduced, as based on cases reported by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, which stands for NCIS. As long as gun control laws stay in place, the number of disturbed citizens who were once able to handle guns will gradually recede. This, in turn, means that frequent shooting sprees caused by the mentally ill will become a thing of the past.

Something all individuals should consider is the warped interpretation of the second amendment. Firstly, the Second Amendment doesn’t state that all types of guns are allowed to be used by well-regulated militias. According to a case conducted in 1939, the court specifically ruled that a sawed-off shotgun was  a weapon allowed into the definition of “arms” and the two convicts were sentenced to jail (United States v. Miller). To go along with this statement, I believe that certain guns do not belong in the definition of what a militia should hold, such as the sawed-off gun mentioned above. Additionally, the Second Amendment can be defined as only relating to citizens in a well-regulated militia. The Second Amendment does not apply to most citizens of today’s United States of America, as during the time period of 1791 (when the Second Amendment was first created), the states were going through fierce war with Britain and guns were a necessity in order to fight off their advances. Nowadays, this amendment is not relevant to the citizens because there are no advances being made on the country, meaning the civilians can rest at ease and remove the guns from their homes without having to worry about attacks from enemy countries. To add on to this explanation even further, not everyone can be put into the category of a militia. Again, if this title were to be interpreted in modern times, the phrase would only include those who know how to properly wield guns, such as policemen or the military. Such terms should not include “regular ” citizens of the United States. Anyone can pick up a gun. Anyone can pull the trigger. But it takes a person who has undergone rigorous training to protect the people. That is what guns are for. Protecting the lives of innocents, not taking them. Criminals should never find their hands on guns, and with new, stricter gun-control laws, there will be less of those who purposefully skirt around the Second Amendment’s true meaning.

I’d like to point out that some groups, such as the NRA, avidly counter the use of gun control laws. The mass of citizens that don’t support these laws often say they are unconstitutional and infringe upon the rights given by the Second Amendment. As previously stated, the term “well -regulated militia” does not apply to everyone. A weapon is a weapon, and once you use those weapons to harm masses of people, your rights will be revoked.
Questions may pop into one’s head, such as, aren’t criminals able to find guns no matter the law with the help of friends or family? or since when has a criminal ever been found abiding by a law? While these questions may ring true, gun control laws are meant to reduce crime over periods of time. Crime is not going to stop overnight, but placing a few laws in each state is sure to drop the murder rates. No matter where you go, someone who should not be found handling a gun is going to have on in possession anyway.

Supporters of anti gun control laws repeatedly proclaim that citizens using guns as means of protecting themselves are okay. For example, a person on the street who sees a criminal in the middle of a robbery might feel the need to whip out a gun, aim, and fire. However, police officers are hired for a specific reason. If a bystander pulls out the gun, they are more likely to do more harm than good. Often times, they may miss and instead hit an innocent person, killing him or her on the spot.

Gun control laws are in high demand. They are meant to keep us safe, and by implanting multiple laws in each state, they will do just that. Parents, legislators, and normal, everyday citizens can all come together when it comes to this topic. A gun in the hands of a criminal can end the life of someone held close to your heart. When a parent loses a child to reckless usage of guns again and again, it is time for a change in the way lax gun control laws are being used today. Can you honestly put a price on the life of a child?

Works Cited
Follman, Mark. "Finally, Some Data on Whether Gun Background Checks Work." Mother Jones. Mother Jones, 22 May 2014. Web. 26 Oct. 2014.

“Gun Control Laws.” Issues & Controversies. Infobase Learning, 17 Dec. 2012. Web. 26 Oct. 2014. .

“Gun Control Reform.” Issues & Controversies. Infobase Learning, 28 Feb. 2011. Web. 14 Nov. 2014. .

Liptak, Adam. "Gun Laws And Crime: A Complex Relationship." The New York Times. The New York Times, 28 June 2008. Web. 26 Oct. 2014.

Shen, Aviva. "A Timeline Of Mass Shootings In The US Since Columbine." ThinkProgress RSS. Think Progress, 14 Dec. 2012. Web. 26 Oct. 2014.

“The Second Amendment.” Issues & Controversies. Infobase Learning, 11 July 2008.Web. 14 Nov. 2014. .

"United States v. Miller." LII / Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School, n.d. Web. 27 Oct. 2014.

Waldman, Michael. "Gun Laws and What the Second Amendment Intended." The Seattle Times 2014 jul 14: N.p. DB - SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 27 Oct. 2014. .