Here’s a Timeline of the Major Gun Control Laws in America ?- Most People Support Gun Restrictions ?

Through their grief, the students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School have become a political force. One week after 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz allegedly used an AR-15 to shoot and kill 17 people at the school, around 100 students met with lawmakers in the Florida state capital to advocate for gun control. They also met with President Trump in the White House Wednesday. In organizing the March For Our Lives, they’ll rally next month in Washington, D.C.

But with the right of gun ownership enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, gun regulations remain a thorny issue in the U.S. Throughout history, there have been several laws and Supreme Court cases that have shaped the Second Amendment. This timeline outlines the most important events in influencing the country’s federal gun policy.

More guns <more gun deaths 
How do people not want gun control that is one of the most stupid thing i have ever seen guns kill 100,000s of people ever year places in the u.S with strong gun control less people die by gun how is that hard to see. This kind of thing makes me sick people die all the time by guns and other people say that more guns is the answer. 

Now that the smoke has settled after tragedy in Parkland, Florida, partisans on the Left and Right have hunkered down in their foxholes to fight a familiar fight. Many on the Left are so exasperated and furious with the lack of gun control measures in Congress that they have taken a fairly new route: calling the National Rifle Association (NRA) a terrorist organization.

We can argue about effectiveness of certain proposals, but if gun control advocates ever want gun owners to come to the table, they need to stop mindless name-calling or risk further dividing the country and neutering their cause.

More gun control laws would reduce gun deaths.
There were 464,033 total gun deaths between 1999 and 2013: 270,237 suicides (58.2% of total deaths); 174,773 homicides (37.7%); and 9,983 unintentional deaths (2.2%).
Guns were the leading cause of death by homicide (66.6% of all homicides) and by suicide (52.2% of all suicides). Firearms were the 12th leading cause of all deaths, representing 1.3% of total deaths topping liver disease, hypertension, and Parkinson’s disease, as well as deaths from fires, drowning, and machinery accidents.
David Frum, Daily Beast and CNN contributor, stated, "American children under age 15 were nine times more likely to die of a gun accident than children in other advanced wealthy countries… About 200 Americans go to emergency rooms every day with gunshot wounds." 
A study published in the American Journal of Public Health found that "legal purchase of a handgun appears to be associated with a long-lasting increased risk of violent death" 
According to a Mar. 10, 2016 Lancet study, implementing federal universal background checks could reduce firearm deaths by a projected 56.9%; background checks for ammunition purchases could reduce deaths by a projected 80.7%; and gun identification requirements could reduce deaths by a projected 82.5%.

Gun control laws infringe upon the right to self-defense and deny people a sense of safety.
According to the National Rifle Association (NRA), guns are used for self-defense 2.5 million times a year.  The police cannot protect everyone all of the time. 61% of men and 56% of women surveyed by Pew Research said that stricter gun laws would "make it more difficult for people to protect their homes and families."
Nelson Lund, JD, PhD, Professor at George Mason University School of Law, stated, "The right to self-defense and to the means of defending oneself is a basic natural right that grows out of the right to life" and "many [gun control laws] interfere with the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves against violent criminals.” Constitutions in 37 US states protect the right to bear arms for self-defense, most with explicit language such as Alabama’s: “every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.” [60] [61] Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President of the NRA, stated, "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."
A May 9, 2013 48% of convicted felons surveyed admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they knew the victim was armed with a gun. Pew Foundation report found that 79% of male gun owners and 80% of female gun owners said owning a gun made them feel safer and 64% of people living in a home in which someone else owns a gun felt safer.
Even Senator Dianne Feinstein, a gun control advocate, carried a concealed gun when her life was threatened and her home attacked by the New World Liberation Front in the 1970s.

Gun control laws, especially those that try to ban "assault weapons," infringe upon the right to own guns for hunting and sport. In 2011, there were 13.7 million hunters 16 years old or older in the United States, and they spent $7.7 billion on guns, sights, ammunition, and other hunting equipment. [65] [66] High-powered semiautomatic rifles and shotguns are used to hunt and in target shooting tournaments each year. [67] According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, “So-called ‘Assault weapons’ are more often than not less powerful than other hunting rifles. The term ‘assault weapon’ was conjured up by anti-gun legislators to scare voters into thinking these firearms are something out of a horror movie… [T]he Colt AR-15 and Springfield M1A, both labeled 'assault weapons,' are the rifles most used for marksmanship competitions in the United States. And their cartridges are standard hunting calibers, useful for game up to and including deer." According to a Feb. 2013 Pew Research report, 32% of gun owners owned guns for hunting and 7% owned guns for target or sport shooting. 

Guns are rarely used in self-defense. 
Of the 29,618,300 violent crimes committed between 2007 and 2011, 0.79% of victims (235,700) protected themselves with a threat of use or use of a firearm, the least-employed protective behavior.
In 2010 there were 230 "justifiable homicides" in which a private citizen used a firearm to kill a felon, compared to 8,275 criminal gun homicides (or, 36 criminal homicides for every "justifiable homicide").  Of the 84,495,500 property crimes committed between 2007 and 2011, 0.12% of victims (103,000) protected themselves with a threat of use or use of a firearm. 

Gun control laws give too much power to the government and may result in government tyranny and the government taking away all guns from citizens. 
57% of people surveyed by Pew Research in Feb. 2013 said that gun control laws would "give too much power to the government over the people."
The NRA's Wayne LaPierre stated, "if you look at why our Founding Fathers put it [the Second Amendment] there, they had lived under the tyranny of King George and they wanted to make sure that these free people in this new country would never be subjugated again and have to live under tyranny." 
Alex Jones, radio host, in a Jan 7, 2013 interview with Piers Morgan, stated, "The Second Amendment isn't there for duck hunting, it's there to protect us from tyrannical government and street thugs… 1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms!"

Gun control laws such as background checks and micro-stamping are an invasion of privacy. 
Background checks would require government databases that keep personal individual information on gun owners, including name, addresses, mental health history, criminal records, and more. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) worried that Senator Harry Reid's 2013 proposed background check legislation (the bill failed 54-46) would have allowed the government to keep databases of gun purchases indefinitely, creating a "worry that you're going to see searches of the databases and an expansion for purposes that were not intended when the information was collected."
Micro-stamping similarly requires a database of gun owners and the codes their personal guns would stamp on cartridge cases.  Senators Rand Paul (R-KY), Mike Lee (R-UT), and Ted Cruz (R-TX) wrote that they would oppose any legislation that infringes "on the American people's constitutional right to bear arms, or on their ability to exercise this right without being subjected to government surveillance." 

More gun control is unnecessary because relatively few people are killed by guns. According to the CDC's "Leading Causes of Death Reports," between 1999 and 2013, Americans were 21.5 times more likely to die of heart disease (9,691,733 deaths); 18.7 times more likely to die of malignant tumors (8,458,868 deaths); and 2.4 times more likely to die of diabetes or 2.3 times more likely to die of Alzheimer's (1,080,298 and 1,053,207 respectively) than to die from a firearm (whether by accident, homicide, or suicide). 
The flu and related pneumonia (875,143 deaths); traffic accidents (594,280 deaths); and poisoning whether via accident, homicide, or suicide (475,907 deaths) all killed more people between 1999 and 2013 than firearms.  Firearms were the 12th leading cause of deaths for all deaths between 1999 and 2013, responsible for 1.3% of deaths with 464,033 deaths. 
Internationally, the claim that the United States has a major problem with firearm homicide is exaggerated. The United States is ranked 28 in international homicide rates with 2.97 gun murders per 100,000 people in 2012.

More gun control is not needed; education about guns and gun safety is needed to prevent accidental gun deaths. 
95% of all US gun owners believe that children should learn about gun safety. 
Guns don't kill people; people kill people. And people need more gun education and mental illness screening to prevent massacres.The Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute, Inc (SAAMI), stated, "Whether in the field, at the range or in the home, a responsible and knowledgeable gun owner is rarely involved in a firearms accident of any kind." 
Heidi Cifelli, Former Program Manager of the NRA's Eddie Eagle GunSafe Program, stated, "Gun education is the best way to save young lives." The NRA states that the Eddie Eagle program is not meant to "teach whether guns are good or bad, but rather to promote the protection and safety of children… Like swimming pools, electrical outlets, matchbooks, and household poison, they're [guns] treated simply as a fact of everyday life." 
According to Kyle Wintersteen, Managing Editor of Guns and Ammo, studies show that "children taught about firearms and their legitimate uses by family members have much lower rates of delinquency than children in households without guns" and "children introduced to guns associate them with freedom, security, and recreation—not violence."

Gun control laws would prevent citizens from protecting themselves from foreign invaders. 
The Libertarian Party stated, "A responsible, well-armed and trained citizenry is the best protection against domestic crime and the threat of foreign invasion." 
Counsel for the NRA stated, "It is evident that the framers of the Constitution did not intend to limit the right to keep and bear arms to a formal military body or organized militia, but intended to provide for an 'unorganized' armed citizenry prepared to assist in the common defense against a foreign invader or a domestic tyrant." 
 Marco Rubio (R-FL), US Senator, speaking about gun control laws during his 2016 presidential campaign, stated, "If God forbid, ISIS visits our life, our neighborhood, our school, any part of us, the last thing standing, the last line of defense could very well be our ability to protect ourselves."

Armed civilians are unlikely to stop crimes and are more likely to make dangerous situations, including mass shootings, more deadly. None of the 62 mass shootings between 1982 and 2012 was stopped by an armed civilian. 
Gun rights activists regularly state that a 2002 mass shooting at the Appalachian School of Law in Virginia was stopped by armed students, but those students were current and former law enforcement officers and the killer was out of bullets when subdued.
 Other mass shootings often held up as examples of armed citizens being able to stop mass shootings involved law enforcement or military personnel and/or the shooter had stopped shooting before being subdued, such as a 1997 high school shooting in Pearl, MS; a 1998 middle school dance shooting in Edinboro, PA; a 2007 church shooting in Colorado Springs, CO; and a 2008 bar shooting in Winnemucca, NV. 
Jeffrey Voccola, Assistant Professor of Writing at Kutztown University, notes, "The average gun owner, no matter how responsible, is not trained in law enforcement or on how to handle life-threatening situations, so in most cases, if a threat occurs, increasing the number of guns only creates a more volatile and dangerous situation."

Strict gun control laws do not work in Mexico, and will not work in the United States.

Mexico has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world and yet, in 2012, Mexico had 11,309 gun murders (9.97 gun homicides per 100,000 people) compared to the United States that had 9,146 gun homicides (2.97 per 100,000 people).
The country has only one legal gun store (the Directorate of Arms and Munitions Sales), compared to at least 63,709 legal gun stores and pawn shops in the United States as of Feb. 10, 2014. 
Mexico's gun store is on a secure military base and customers must present a valid ID, go through a metal detector, and turn over cellphones and cameras to guards. To actually buy a gun, customers have to show proof of honest income, provide references, pass a criminal background check, prove any military duties were completed with honor, and be fingerprinted and photographed. If allowed to purchase a gun, the customer may buy only one gun (choosing from only .38 caliber pistols or lower) and one box of bullets. Between 2006 and 2010, Mexico's one gun shop sold 6,490 guns,  yet as of 2012, Mexicans own about 15,000,000 guns, or about 13.5 guns per 100 people. 

How can you possibly support gun control?
I've got a grand idea. Lets make drugs, driving drunk and speeding illegal. OH WAIT, its already illegal. And you know what, people still do it! Take guns away from lawful, non-violent citizens and guess what, criminals still have their guns! If the government went after those who legally purchased a registered firearm, then criminals would still have their guns. Their guns aren't registered so they will not turn them in! In fact, when you take guns away from law abiding citizens, guess what, crime increases because people are more vulnerable. 
There are lots of different gun owners in the US. There are those who do it strictly for hobby, like myself. We dont shoot to be violent or practice our killing skills, we shoot for the sport. Its fun its a skill that can be practiced, its like golf. You aim, you shoot and see how close you are, then you try again to get better. Other people have a gun or two for personal or home defense. Again, nothing wrong here, they dont have the intention of killing someone.
 Most people keep a fire extinguisher in their house dont they? Not because they expect a fire but they want to be prepared to protect themselves and their home if at all possible. Also, police arrive on scene after the shooting happens. I live about 45 minutes west of Milwaukee, and on the news there is always a shooting that happened very early in the morning. 
They always say police think the shooting occurred around 1am or 2am because they werent even called until after the crime was done. If somebody breaks into your house, the odds are that 99 percent of the time, police will not arrive until the criminal is long gone. Still yet, there are people who keep and bear arms to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. Thats what the second amendment was originally written for. 
The first step in any tyrannical government is to take away its citizens' guns. Hitler, Stalin or even Great Britain did it to its imperialized territories to prevent an up rising. Japan was planning to attack the west coast of the US after Pearl Harbor, the reason the general declined? "There will be a gun behind every blade of grass." Take the citizens guns away and guess what, we're an easy target. So next time you cry and moan about Sandy Hook or Aurora, imagine if every teacher in the building had an assigned, case-locked side arm that could be used to protect the students in an intruder situation. I guarantee less kids would have died. Or if people in the movie theater were CCW. 
One calm, precise shot, as the CCW holders are trained for hours to do and a great many lives would have been saved. Because when those men barge in on a killing spree, they arent expecting opposition, they arent ready to be shot at. They search for the gun-less, easy target.

This isn’t just about my gun. It’s about every single individual’s fundamental right to liberty. And liberty is absolutely worth protecting. Our founders pledged their very lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor defending it. So must we.

The average voter does want it, they just don't want it enough. There is a large enthusiasm gap between those in favor of restrictions and those opposed.

Take this thought experiment:
– If you had to choose between gun control and higher minimum wage, which would you choose?
– If you had to choose between gun control and making sexual orientation / gender identity a protected class, which would you choose?
– If you had to choose between gun control and regulations to limit carbon emissions, which would you choose?
– If you had to choose between gun control and student loan debt forgiveness, which would you choose?
– If you had to choose between gun control and Medicare For All, which would you choose?

Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.

This is a good motto to live by, despite how you think about things.

Individuals can still hope for the best (that things can and will eventually work out), but what good is your prosperity what going to do if you don’t have anything to eat or a safe place to hang out for an extended period of time?

Why not prepare while you still can — when things are readily available and can still be purchased at cheap prices? The coming hyper-inflation will make any such purchases beforehand look very intelligent…

To prepare for the worst, you need a plan. Why are most people so against doing basic preparations that could be the difference on how they survive — or whether they survive?

History shows time and again that those who prepare always fare better than those who did not.

Having a plan and being determined to act on that plan will always be the best way to handle any contingencies, should they occur.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *