Gun control refers to the restrictions that have been imposed through the enactment of laws that prevent some people from having access and using firearms (Degrezia, 2014). According to the US government, this measure is imperative because the central administration desires to cut down on the number of deaths which arise as a result of suicide (Rabat, 2009). Moreover, the US government views the regulations as the best way to prevent the emergence of crime scenes. However, law-abiding citizens are allowed to have guns because of the belief that the weapons would offer them a mechanism for self-defense (Rabat, 2009). The people who advocate for the gun control policies subscribe to the opinion that the lack of the measures that make it hard for people to acquire the firearms would make it too easy for the individuals to get the weapons. To that end, they are of the view that it is essential for the restrictions to be imposed. People in the US use the guns for self-defense (Ghatak, 2017).
The first gun control measures in the US were viewed as barbaric and discriminatory (Rabat, 2009). It is because the regulations were aimed at undermining the African-Americans. Such laws were introduced during the pre-Revolution. The Whites felt that it was good for the Blacks to be denied the opportunity to own guns because it was an avenue that ensured that there was the White dominance because of the belief that the African-Americans were subordinated (Rabat, 2009). It is in spite of the civil war that had taken place in the country. The Blacks were not permitted to have the weapons to protect themselves, and thus this form of discrimination led them to face the darkest hours of their lives. The situation put the Blacks in a position that made them unable to fight for their rights which were not included in the constitution of the nation. Towards the conclusion of the 19th century, control of the firearms targeted the Northern part of the United States. It is because there was a reported increase in the number of immigrants from European nations and other countries. To that end, it was imperative for the US to come up with policies that formed an obstacle for the acquisition of the weapons by the immigrants because of the fear of an increase in the number of crimes that could pose a danger to the US nationals in the North (Rabat, 2009). The gun control measures that captured this region were applauded because of the reality that they were not discriminatory. It is contrary to the laws of the South which ensured that the whites were more powerful than the Blacks. It was for the first time that the US government introduced the regulations that controlled the possession of the guns in the Northern part of the nation. Before the 18th century, there were no control measures in this region and people could acquire the weapons at their own will. Today, there is the notion that the discrimination is ongoing whereby the minority groups in the US are restricted from having possession of the firearms.
Gun control measures in the US took different forms. For instance, in the year 1968, a bill was passed in the US parliament that abolished the existence of cheap guns in the market (Rabat, 2009). The goal of this regulation enactment was to reduce the number of crimes in the US. It was seen as a precaution measure. However, it was later revealed by the insiders that this move was aimed at ensuring that the militant groups of the African-American origin did not have access to the weapons. The ban targeted the poor people in the society, and the US government was of the opinion that this move was critical to the nation because it kept the firearms from landing in the hands of the poor in the society (Rabat, 2009). They believed that this was an appropriate way of ensuring that the weapons were not available in the crime-prone areas. Anyone who had a gun in such an area was viewed as a criminal and could be prosecuted. The people who advocate for this kind of prejudice argue that it is appropriate in the controlling of gun violence. However, other people subscribed to the idea that the availability of the guns in the market does not necessarily mean that there are going to be evil doings. Equally, the firearms fetch a high market demand from the criminals whether the cost of acquiring the weapons is high or low. This has been demonstrated by the researchers in various field studies.
Over the years, several debates have emerged on gun control measures (Degrezia, 2014). For instance, there are those people who advocated for the application of moderate gun control measures. These individuals supported the use of this approach because of numerous reasons. To begin with, there were incidences in the US that led to the death of many people.For example, in the year 2012; several reports emerged of people who were killed in mass gun shootings (Degrezia, 2014). For example, a person with a firearm weapon shot and killed twelve individuals in Aurora, Colorado. Fifty-eight more men and women were injured during the incidence. Besides, there was also another case of a man who shot and killed his mother and twelve school kids before taking his life. The name of the individual was Adam Lanza. The blatant murders took place in Newton (Degrezia, 2014). The occurrence of this scenario spurred a lot of discussions mainly because it involved students at their tender ages. It was the worst assassination since the attempted murder of President Reagan. Thus, there were debates on whether the federal government should introduce policies that do not allow people to own and use firearms. Many of those who took part in the deliberations wanted to know precisely the type of the people who should be allowed to possess guns in the nation (Kopel, 2017). They argued that private ownership of the firearms should be granted only to those individuals who can demonstrate that they can live to the expectations of the law. According to the US Supreme Court, the people who should be allowed the right to own the guns are the ones who can indicate