Case Against Gun Control

Words: 1000
Pages: 4

AFFIRMATIVE CASE

Yes, people pull the trigger - but guns are the instrument of death. Gun control is necessary, and delay means more death and horror.
It is because I agree with Eliot Spitzer that I affirm today’s resolution

Resolved: Government limits on the individual's right to bear arms in the United States is justified.

For clarification of today's round I offer the following definitions:

Government-Exercise of authority in a political unit

Limits-A confining or a restricting object, agent

Individual-Existing as a distinct entity; separate

Right to bear arms-Rule that allows individuals to own firearms.

Justified-To demonstrate or prove to be just, right, or valid

The value for today’s round will be security. Security is the
…show more content…
13,000 of these results in American deaths, making America the highest (Among 25 high income nations) nation in firearm deaths. A gun in a home even increases the chances of it being utilized in an accidental shooting, sexual assault, and suicide attempt rather than in self-defense. The U.S. Supreme Court in the case of District of Columbia vs. Heller even verbally expressed that the second amendment forces vigorous gun laws such as prohibit firearm possession by felons and mentally ill and impose conditions on commercial sale of firearms. This clearly shows that limits are beneficial and guns getting into the wrong hands could lead to far more deaths than 30,000. In another study by mayors against illegal guns in 2008 found that states with the highest gun export rates were top in guns recovered in crime. They also found that states with weak gun laws had the highest rate of gun deaths. Bridge: This shows that stricter limits will prevent guns from getting into the wrong hands and furthermore save lives. Backing: By limiting guns we are directly saving lives and improving America’s future as a whole.
Impact: this is relevant because Americans are dying because of guns and this is thoroughly immoral. If we implement more stringent limits we will preserve lives. With more stronger control America prevents many deaths and our rights would be safe.
This correlates to my value of security because reducing crime and preserving lives we increase and ascertain the security of America and its people. This ties in to my criterion because we preserve the greatest amount of lives and more stringent limits would be the most efficient way to do