The aim of weapons is to kill. Therefore, we should prohibit such types of machines
One of the main questions that people ask themselves all the time is: If weapons are killing machines, why were they invented? No one has the correct answer for this. In addition, does having weapons have any morality? “I ask whether weapons research is ever justified”. He added also, that weapons research is the business of engineers. Furthermore, weapon business is one of the most popular businesses all over the world. Even countries and nations are built based on the weapon business. Consequently, some countries call the weapon “defiance weapons”, and people need to understand that there are different levels according to law that define these weapons.
people need to understand that there are different standards justifying and identify these weapons. Nations have two different viewpoints regarding the same tool. For example, some nations justify that weapons are created to protect people. On the other hand, some nations justify weapons as a tool to protect peace. In these two situations, the conflict happens. Therefore, the question again Are the weapons to protect or to kill. The viewpoint of government is different from the soldiers and people in general. Soldiers use weapons to protect themselves in war, and were designed to kill either civilians or soldiers. In addition, the weapons kill other people with civil identity or people in soldier identity. Thus, the result is killing people. Even if people understand that the weapons kill, the other question is, why do the engineers keep researching and finding new advanced technology in the weapons’ field. The answer is clear, based on the observed situation all over the world; governments make the wars and sales agents market these weapons. Thus, some governments’ economy is built on these wars. Therefore, the need of keeping such fights all over the world has become urgent to keep this business alive.
From all the previous information, people can understand one important idea: the engineers are no more than a tool. Such tool has been used as the weapon to kill. Since the weapons kill, the person who thinks of such ideas is also part of the crime. Therefore, there is no morality in the field of weapons since it works against humanity, where humanity is one of the boundaries and limitations that any person who is working in any industrial field should keep in mind. If any inventor thinks of not only his life but also others life, then he will understand immediately that weapons were created to kill as a first goal not to save others life. Therefore, it is necessary to prohibit such type of machines. Sport of shooting is a way of legalizing the weapons, but this should be prohibited. Different sports represent one way to improve human mentality or body abilities. On the other hand, some sports represent a dangerous effect on human and communities. Shooting take a wide spread in the last 10 years especially in the United States. Especially this sport has more than one negative point in environment in one side and other effect on the community.
The main effect over our environment is shooting sport represent one of threat for animal life. Not only this but also shooting sport extends to affect our health, where the first partial effects of shooting are ours. Where sound measures by Hertz, so high frequency effect direct on ears abilities and functionality .Other problems also may appear like Pinched nerves and stiffness in the neck, and back pain. Not surprisingly, this study found out that hunting and shooting sports are concentrated in rural areas. Middle-aged people from the middle income household relate to the possession. All related suppose there is less crime and violence intervention there are more guns in the hands of those who have the ability to abuse them. Some Support for this view comes from the fact that people arrested on gun Murder, unlike the majority of gun owners, have a prior criminal history
After more than one accident people start to believe gun control, especially after one of the most tragedy action happened by killing 26innocent schoolchildren and teachers which affected the citizens of America. From that point people starting thinking whom we can protect our kids, family, and our self. A very simple answer appears by control of gun we save our community lives.
Some people believe the evil in the heart, where this evil enables people to hurt another. On other handgun, represents main tool to enable people to kill another in very fast and more people can be dying at the same moment. Moreover, according to studies, there is a deep connection between the figure or crimes committed in the U.S. and the number of firearms in the hands of individuals. The gun control law has an important questions, one of them is who can hold a gun and under which conditions she/he can hold it. To answer this question we need a moral sense to say yes or no. On other handgun owners can specify who have abilities to do that or not. Therefore, before we control gun, we need a moral system that restricts gun controller system. If there are laws that govern bearing of weapons, it will control the ability and of these weapons that end up in the arms of citizens illegal. A Harvard study showed that, in general, the burden of proof that “more guns equals more deaths and fewer guns equals less of death” not respecting the evidence in a wide range of countries. You can view it in the United States over the past two decades, and going more weapons in circulation, while each of the levels of violence and murder has been reduced significantly.
Most Americans think that criminals should be burnt from access weapons legally. At this era, the law convicts any found in possession of a firearm. However, the law also allows criminals to acquire firearms. According to Weapons, data from two studies of criminals have the right to apply for a gun just like any ordinary citizens. Criminals also face insecurity and the issue surrounding whether criminals should bear the right to own a firearm should not be politicized. This issue should be viewed from the context as to why a citizen should bear the right to own a firearm. This is based on a survey of prisoners in the state Prisons, criminal background check, and an old man who had been imprisoned for crimes. Expansion of prohibited firearms people who are alcoholics or problem could reduce alcohol-related violence. However, federal law prohibits firearms alcoholics Possession of firearms and only 16 states have laws prohibiting the possession of alcoholic beverages Firearms. In addition, some of the missing weapons states to ban alcohol addicts allow the authorities to enforce.
The Burden of an armed society is significant because we have seen many productive lives lost in violence related crimes, the economy of town loss millions of dollars and fear brought among communities that were social to other communities. In many countries, gun ownership is only reserved for the high-income individuals. However, making gun ownership a choice for every individual is like declaring insecurity amongst your own citizens. The standards that govern the policy of gun control should be revised in order to find the right target group who should be prohibited from owning a firearm. This will help reduce the number of gun related violence in the state records every year. The practice is not intended to rule most of Firearms in the United States have Significant Impact on the prevalence of guns, but to reduce the crime and reckless use of weapons by banning in possession of specific groups, such as young people and felons. Unfortunately, there is a need to develop an effective program to prevent gun to the possibility for misuse of guns amongst individuals who qualify to own one. They do not need supervision in the house-to-house, but it will be enough to manage deal effectively (Brown 2012 p. 345). The reason is the abuse usually follows a quick acquisition of guns. In other words, millions of current account holders to gun crime a little rough five years from now. Just goal, then, is effective to increase the price of the gun in the high-risk the market.
Regardless of this situation, it is possible to develop a program that will help uphold the difference between the efficiency of market guns alternative who were prevented from getting a preponderance who will not spend abuse of owning a gun. Some researcher argues, this policy should focus on reducing the misuse of gun other than disarming individual because there are citizens who deserve the right to own firearms. Another argues that gun policies should focus on misuse by management because they play a major role in arming the citizens. The punishment regarding gun laws should focus on the context in which a crime was committed. This will help reduce crimes recorded in the country because the current law contributes to the increased number of individual’s murder at gunpoint. Direct laws that are aimed at stopping citizens from owning firearms will not ease the situation rather than increase the number of arms in the hands of the citizens illegally. These laws not only endanger the lives of citizens but also the lives of policemen.
In conclusion, believe the government cannot stop the shooting. Violence is always difficult to understand. However, that should not prevent us from taking steps to improve the situation in the hands of the facts. We will not stop gun violence, in many cases, but we can work to slow their existence as long as we all agree that there are some problems that improvements can be made, and decide which is more complex than we have been led to believe. Partly due to differences in opinion, thrive in the absence of solid evidence help cut contradictory assertions. Improving the quality of evidence what works in reducing gun violence, researchers need sound research who is keeping an open mind on the issues. The weapon also provides a fast and reliable person to suicide. However, in suicide, as opposed to attacks, there are other dangerous means are available for those who have time to plan, even hanging and jumping from a tall building or bridge. However, there is some evidence that access to guns does not affect the suicide rate.