Gun Violence
So, I was studying for my exam the other day and it's for my Murder and Other Crimes history course. We had to read this book called "Guns and Violence" where an American scholar, Joyce Lee Malcolm, discusses the history of weapons and crime in England, in comparion to the United States.
She presents the following theory about guns in relation to crime rates:
Basically, Malcolm believes that the fact that American law allows citizens to carry concealed, loaded weapons is not the reason for the violence that occurs within the United States. In fact, she argues that American crime rates are lower than ever because the fact that most Americans carry guns scare off potential criminals. So, she say's the reason why violence is at its highest in England right now is because the government took away the citizens' right to bear arms, therefore allowing for those "priviledged" few who carry loaded pistols to attack whomever they please.
Overall, Malcolm blames the fact that there is continual racial and class tensions in the United States, which in her opinion, results in the crime rise. Not the fact that 80 of every 100 Americans owns a gun, a statistic I find more than a little unsettling.
In light of the Virginia Tech massacre, what do some of you think of this arguement? I think it's pretty meritless. I mean, guns are violent weapons that allow you to take multiple lives. Put in the hands of dangerous criminals or even regular citizens, how do they have a right to take a life? I think the law in England, which takes guns away from its citizens, is smarter than letting anyone own a loaded pistol. Malcolm even blames the English for being the reason behind the American constitutional right to bear arms, stating that when the English people came over to colonize the Americans, they all owned guns. I don't understand this arguement. Of course they carried guns. They were trying to rule over a territory, whether it was right or wrong. It doesn't mean everyone owned a gun back home in England. But, whatever.
I'm from Canada. Born and raised in Toronto. And we have very different laws from both England and the U.S. regarding guns. Here in Canada you need a permit for the gun, you can never carry it concealed, and if you are transporting it (anywhere) it cannot be loaded and police must be notified that this is occuring.
I just found the whole thing fascinating. Is there really any right or wrong way to deal with gun-ownership laws? What do you guys think?
She presents the following theory about guns in relation to crime rates:
Basically, Malcolm believes that the fact that American law allows citizens to carry concealed, loaded weapons is not the reason for the violence that occurs within the United States. In fact, she argues that American crime rates are lower than ever because the fact that most Americans carry guns scare off potential criminals. So, she say's the reason why violence is at its highest in England right now is because the government took away the citizens' right to bear arms, therefore allowing for those "priviledged" few who carry loaded pistols to attack whomever they please.
Overall, Malcolm blames the fact that there is continual racial and class tensions in the United States, which in her opinion, results in the crime rise. Not the fact that 80 of every 100 Americans owns a gun, a statistic I find more than a little unsettling.
In light of the Virginia Tech massacre, what do some of you think of this arguement? I think it's pretty meritless. I mean, guns are violent weapons that allow you to take multiple lives. Put in the hands of dangerous criminals or even regular citizens, how do they have a right to take a life? I think the law in England, which takes guns away from its citizens, is smarter than letting anyone own a loaded pistol. Malcolm even blames the English for being the reason behind the American constitutional right to bear arms, stating that when the English people came over to colonize the Americans, they all owned guns. I don't understand this arguement. Of course they carried guns. They were trying to rule over a territory, whether it was right or wrong. It doesn't mean everyone owned a gun back home in England. But, whatever.
I'm from Canada. Born and raised in Toronto. And we have very different laws from both England and the U.S. regarding guns. Here in Canada you need a permit for the gun, you can never carry it concealed, and if you are transporting it (anywhere) it cannot be loaded and police must be notified that this is occuring.
I just found the whole thing fascinating. Is there really any right or wrong way to deal with gun-ownership laws? What do you guys think?