"Running head:OWNING GUNS IN USA1Should gun be owned by the citizen in the USAAuthor’s nameInstitutional affiliation Running head:OWNING GUNS IN USA2Should guns be owned by THE citizen in the USA?This essay begins by providing essential terms for the argument before laying down thebackground of the situation. The next thing is outlining important position with full support.Toelaborate and explains the significant positions differing views is discussed.At the end of thepaper possible solution is directed for future research. In America, everyone has the sameopinion of owning a gun as part of the customs that comprise American people. Every side forthose debating about ownership of the firearm understands firearms as an embedded thing in thesociety of the citizens. Nevertheless for other individuals having a right to own guns issomething that is nonnegotiable since it is guaranteed in the constitution. For others, it issomething reasonable to hold it.Individual security is essential, and one should own gun to forself-defense in case there is an attack.However, such move leads to the death of innocentindividuals when used in wrong way.In my view owning a gun is the best decision in dealing with criminals who don’t havemercy for the acts of robbing. According to DeGrazia, and Hunt (2016) “It has been realized thatthe enforcement of the law cannot be available in every part including the remote areas of theAmerican nation, yet many individual rely on 911 calls to have protection whenever there is aterror in homes” (p.654).In most cases, the first security responders can take an hour to reachremote areas to provide security service in case of emergencies. Even five minutes can be toolong since the robbers can cause chaos and ran away. If the owner of the house is armed andtrained, the security is enhanced. The modern psychologists have played a vital role somethingwhich is critical in developing the health and confidence of humankind. The most surprisingthing is that the private organization who owns gun provides the same. According to Quiram(2001), 63% of the Americans, citizens believe that owning a gun in the homes enhances security Running head:OWNING GUNS IN USA3and is on the safe side” (P.354). While some individuals may dismiss the importance of havingbetter protection or may claim the desire for personal safety,criminals may as well make oneunsafe. Security is thus an essential factor in human’s life.Without it, people becomesfrightened, annoyed, and defensive often not capable of reaching specific goals, or even focusingon, higher ambition.The philosophy of protecting oneself during an attack always entailsfighting, running, and hiding, thus holding a gun is a beneficial thing since one can overpowerthe enemy.In further supporting my argument, owning a gun is vital in protecting business propertiesand wealth. Jacobs andSiegel(1997)assert that“the utilization of private guns by one millionAmerican carried out yearly is mainly focused on providing security to personal properties aswell as the lives of the people” (p56). In a situation of protecting the lives, defending against acrime using a gun is the safest method for the victims.Such involvement is associated with lowrate of injury on both victims, and the enemy is defeated. American criminals are less likely toinvade the homes occupied by armed citizens due to fears of being attacked by the homeowners. Rossi (2017) claims that “four percent of the citizen living in England own handguns due to strictpolicies which restrict them from using the guns”(112). On the other hand, the fifty-nine percentof homes are customarily occupied when a burglar breaks as compared to twenty-eight percent ofthe US population. Even if the landowner does not own a gun, the person will be required tounlock the weapon from its safeguard, and then open a different safe where the bullets are kept,and the firearm is loaded before carrying out the defense. It is believed that hand crime level hadincreased due to the ban on the gun in 2009. Another reason is that owning a gun by a civilian reduces the crime rate since thecriminals will be the primary targets. Usually, the criminals fear the ordinary citizen than the Running head:OWNING GUNS IN USA4police officers mainly because of some reasons. The first goal is that the police officers arealways not present during the scene thus the citizen act on their will to defend themselveswithout being noticed.The next point is that police officer adheres to strict rule, and they areallowed to use a gun whenever it is necessary, but the citizen does not adhere to such regulations.The last point is that many civilians luck better training and whenever they face danger theyshoot to kill rather than injuring the criminals for quick arrest for them to be charged. According to the research study carried out by United States Department of Justice(1997), it found that more than 1,800 prisoners were afraid of ordinary citizens owning gunssince they did not tolerate any criminals’ offenders. (p.412). Thirty-three percent of the numberof those offenders admitted being scared of the people who own guns since they shoot on them.69% of the prisoners were acquainted about other crimes of individuals who had a similarexperience.80 % of felon also asserted that they intentionally kept away from victims andresidence that are believed to be armed. This action shows that one person in three criminals hasbeen frightened by an armed citizen and that four individual out of five avoided them. Although it is right to use a gun for one's safety, negative impact arisesIn manytragedies related to the gun shooting,Journalists mostly focus on several incidents on thenumber of people killed by guns, the number of children who own firearms without being givenauthority and the various individual who shoot sprees. Many individuals become reckless bypulling in public.Individual ownership of the guns has a negative impact on American society.According to Dizard, Muth, and Andrews (1999), 1% of mass shooting occurs in a free zone gunfiring, and it is believed to have started in 1950.It means that the criminal feels that they aresaved and could choose these places to carry out their massacre. After the implementation ofcarrying concealed law was passed some shooting in mass fall dramatically.Running head:OWNING GUNS IN USA5The fall doesn't just go down in itself but it is because people are entitled to carry outweapons thus can stop the offender from performing these acts hence decreasing the level ofdestructions and violence. According to Hagan (2008), the police opinion regarding gun controlwas carried out through an interview, and it was concluded that ninety percent of the policeofficers could agree on the issue of actual shooting as vital since it decreases the number ofcausalities attacked. About 28% of carrying concealed policies is beneficial during a large-scalepublic firing regarding the counter-argument of an armed citizen. There is a higher probability ofincreased causalities in public mass bullet firing, but it is noted that if there is a militant shooterthing could be terrible and with no interference, many would be wounded.The increase in the mass shooting has led to the implementation of gun control policies.The new system has further led to more problems. There is a truth behind the anti-gun argumentregarding the safety of the individual and the public. It is right that the owner who owns the gunoften commit suicide using these weapons and therefore the control of gun usage can lower thethreat of death.However, the control of gun does not impact the number of the individuals whocommit suicide research proves that those individuals who intend to hurt themselves or causeharm to themselves search for other methods if the weapons are not available (Lytton, 2006,P12).Kubrin and Wadsworth (2009) claim that “individuals who own the gun is 43time morelikely to shoot the family members whenever there is rankles than an incoming intruder” (p.78).The acts of shooting the family member include murder using the firearms; suicide and fatalaccidents. In further exploring the study on why shooting causes the loss of innocents’ lives, 43deaths are as a result of suicides. As discussed the restriction of gun control does not result insome deaths carried out by an individual. It depends on the motive of the person. "