The gun control debate is a never-ending issue. Both sides have strong arguments, but neither can find a common ground. Law-abiding Americans are being punished for crimes of the few. Stricter gun control laws should not be pursued because they will not work. Illegal activity happens regardless of law, so the second amendment should be upheld as it stands in order that American families can remain protected.
Gun violence has been surfaced recently by the media. American society has been made aware of the gun threat as more of a political scheme than anything. The growing need for gun control that the government thinks we need is null. Criminals do not care about gun laws just as they are oblivious to drug laws. Taking guns from the American people will only allow the amount of crime to increase. Henri Bradford Linden states “Instead of depriving law-abiding citizens of our right to own guns, why not make the penalties for gun-related crimes so severe that someone might think twice before he commits such a crime?” This is true, but at the same time most large gun crimes end in the death of the assailant whether by their own hand or the hands of law enforcement. A common argument is about the United Kingdom’s ban on personal gun ownership of their citizens, but little do they realize that firearm crime has grown thirty-five percent last year (Gun Crime Soars), so it obviously doesn’t work. Adam Lanza, the Sandy Hook shooter, did not own any firearms. Instead he took the weapons from his mother who was an avid gun collector. The Columbine massacre happened with illegally obtained weapons (not only firearms) as well. This shows that regardless if one owns a firearm they could still find access to one and use it for the wrong reasons. Instead of worrying about removing guns from the populace the government should be stricter on requiring owners to follow stricter gun safety procedures like weapon trigger locks and gun safes.
The second amendment was put in place by the Founding Fathers so that, if needed, citizens could protect themselves from their government. This means nothing if American leaders disregard it. The government should not be allowed to break the foundation of the constitution, but they still do no matter the cost. The United States of America would die piece by piece becoming more of a dictatorship than a democracy if allowed to decrease the constitutional rights of the citizens. Owning firearms is as American as baseball and football, so taking this right away is absolutely un-American. Background checks are sufficient enough to allow one to own a firearm. Americans who own guns by legal means are not the problem, so they should not have their rights violated. Americans right to bear arms is fair and just before stripping rights from citizens; the government should concentrate on issues more pressing.
Take away the firearms from the people and they cannot protect themselves. Imagine if a criminal was to break into some ones...