The Availability of Guns to the Criminals
Part 1A: The idea of abolishing gun laws and regulations will impact positively in terms of the access of firearms by criminals. This is to mean that the hustle in the acquisition of guns of by felons will no longer be a problem. Gun law abolition is worth trial since the existing gun control measures do not significantly reduce the prevalence of crime rates. Moreover, with the abolition of these regulations and laws, the brutality employed by felons in their quest of acquiring firearms will be minimised. Therefore, it is correct to state that gun laws have no impact on firearm access by criminals. Thus, a criminal who has a motive for owning a gun will still so regardless of the gun control policies in place. On the other hand, the rampant access to firearms that might be witnessed following the abolition of gun laws does not necessarily imply that there will be an upsurge in violent acts. To sum up, firearm access will increase rapidly should the instituted gun laws be abolished.
Part 1B: The main reasoning behind all citizens being allowed to possess guns is simply for self-defence and security purposes. For the success of this endeavor, it would be of utmost importance to do away with the restrictive regulations imposed by the relevant authorities. The scrubbing of these regulations will ensure that people in the different sociocultural dimensions are taken care of in terms of ease of acquiring firearms. Moreover, I do think that a majority of the citizens are adequately responsible for them to be permitted unconditional ownership of guns. On the other hand, a gun is but a tool that and has to be operated so as release the intent of the person using it. Thus, if people in gun possession go out on shooting spree it’s not the fault of the gun.
Part 2: Actually, the market for guns whether illicit or licit can never be curbed since all the illegal firearms were once legal. This is regardless of whether they were possessed by individual citizens, non-state actors or the state itself.
Therefore, all efforts should be focussed towards the best punishments to be meted out on those caught on the wrong side of the gun market. This is because it’s not possible to control the illegal acquisition of firearms by just simply targeting the illicit gun market. Apparently, the so-called the licit market is a major perpetrator of illegal firearm acquisition transactions. It’s therefore, critical for the establishment of severe punishments to be administered on those found in the illegal firearm dealings.
Part 3: The question of the availability of guns to the criminals is the major source of the discrepancy between the guns confiscated from the felons and the survey results obtained by Rossi and Wright. This is because the preferred firearms by the felons might not have been available during the times they committed their various crimes. Thus, explaining why more cheap guns were confiscated from criminals due to their availability and ease of acquisition. Moreover, it is also evident that due to the felons’ preference for expensive handguns, a variety of cheap handguns were found at their premises and at the same time some expensive guns also found. Thus, the reconciliation of these facts would have been of great importance in coming up with precise results of the survey.
Part 4: The most effective policies in crime prevention would be heavy taxation on all gun purchases. This would make citizens and criminals result to other protective weaponry such as clubs, knives, and sawed off guns among others. This measure would significantly cause a substitution of guns for other weapons. On the other hand, the least effective policy would be the abolition of handguns because the criminals would still strive to acquire them anyway. Thus, this would lead to heightening the demand for the handguns by criminals.