D EBATE U.S. Constitution • Government

IM T S SPICULS

«C COOK z iw : n ! l u barisquc soiTti Ttxis hickory

IC7 CS U T B 10BR HOT CTIUT 1I5T 5TLI1S IMTOW5

u/u/u/lm if;s IbIbi§ i:bbbbi713-655-0033

l J11 Mi f «

Does the U.S. Need Tougher Gun-Control Laws?

O L A S T M O N T H , a gunman opened fire in the baggage claim of the airport in Fort

Lauderdale, Florida. The shooter was later identified as an Army vet­eran who had sought help for mental illness. Fie killed five people.

The deadly shooting reignited a long-standing debate about firearms in the United States. The U.S. has more guns—and gun deaths—than any other developed country. As firearms have become more

powerful and mass shootings fill the news, arguments over gun laws have grown more heated.

Some people say that we need stricter laws to limit the kinds of guns that are legal to own and make it harder for criminals to get weap­ons. These kinds of restrictions are known as gun control.

Opponents of such measures say that most gun-control laws violate the ‘‘right to bear arms” that the Framers laid out in the Second

Amendment to the Constitution. In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that this amendment protects a person’s right to keep a loaded firearm for self-defense.

Congress hasn’t passed major gun-control legislation in two decades. President Donald Trump has said he would oppose any new gun-control measures. He favors expanding gun owners’ rights.

Does the U.S. need tougher gun- control laws? Two experts weigh in.

22 FEBRUARY 20, 2017GO TO JUNIOR.SCHOLASTIC.COM TO: ( 1 ) Download a Skills Sheet / / (S^Vote Online

JOH

NN

Y H

AN

SO

N/©

HO

US

TON

CH

RO

NIC

LE (

PE

OP

LE W

ITH

GU

NS

)

We lose more than

36 ,0 0 0 Am ericans to gun vio lence every year in th is

country. That’s an average o f 99 gun deaths a day.

These tragedies range from accidents and suicides to ho rr ific mass shootings like the one at the Pulse n igh tc lub in Orlando, F lorida, last June.

No o the r dem ocracy in the w orld experiences th is level o f gun violence. That’s because o ther free nations have tough

gun laws to deal w ith this problem .

It ’s estim ated tha t

Am ericans own m ore than 3 0 0 m illion guns. Guns

certa in ly do no t cause crim e, b u t the fa c t tha t they are so easily available

does make crim es more deadly. S im ply put, when

m ore people have guns, the odds go up th a t those guns w ill be used.

W e’re all tired o f reading stories abou t shooters who passed background checks and legally

purchased firearm s desp ite h istories o f v io len t behavior, severe mental illness, and substance

abuse. And th a t’s when background checks are

required. A new survey found tha t 22 percent o f gun owners recently bough t a firearm th rough a priva te

sale. Such sales do not require a background check and are legal in more than 30 states. That gives

dangerous people a free pass to arm themselves.W e need tougher gun laws across the board, but

a log ical place to sta rt is w ith the enactm ent o f a federal law requ iring background checks on all gun

sales. Those checks should also be strengthened to b lock all those w ith a h is to ry o f violence.

The United States is known fo r accom plish ing extrao rd ina ry th ings. Never le t anyone te ll you tha t

we can’t save the lives w e ’ re losing to gun violence. W e can, and we must.

-L A D D EVERITTDirector, One Pulse for America*

On July 24, 2014, a d o c to r

used his concealed handgun to disable a gunm an w ho had

begun firing in a hospita l in Darby, Pennsylvania.

One hospita l w orker had been killed. Police said

tha t if the d o c to r had not been armed, many more innocent people w ould have died.

As fo r the gunman, no t only d id he ignore the

hosp ita l’s “ no weapons” po licy, he had both a

mental and a crim inal record tha t d isqualified him from possessing firearm s under federal law.

And th a t is precisely the prob lem : Gun con tro l has consistently fa iled to keep bad guys from g e tting

firearm s. G un-contro l advocates claim tha t we just need tougher laws. But w ith thousands o f pages

o f fa iled gun laws already on the books, i t ’s h ighly

unrealistic to th ink th a t enacting m ore restric tions w ill w ork any better.

In 2003, the Centers fo r Disease C ontro l and Prevention (CDC) examined dozens o f gun and

am m unition bans, w a iting periods, and background

checks. A fte r analyzing all these restrictions,

the CDC concluded tha t the “ evidence was insu ffic ient to determ ine

the effectiveness o f any o f

these [g u n -co n tro l] laws.”

The CDC exam ined the issue again in 2013 and

reported tha t there are

between 5 0 0 ,0 0 0 and 3 m illion annual cases o f

guns being used fo r self- defense. This means tha t

people are using guns to save a life 16 to 100 tim es m ore o ften than to take a life.

In 2008, the Supreme C ourt ru led on the “ righ t

to keep and bear arms,” which is p ro tec ted by

the Second Am endm ent to the C onstitu tion . The

C ourt co rrec tly noted tha t th is r ig h t “ belongs to all

Am ericans.” We should re ject add itiona l restric tions on th is im portan t right.

-E R IC H PRATT Executive Director, Gun Owners of America

W e lose m ore th a n 36,000 A m ericans to gun violence every year.

People are using guns to save a life m ore o ften th a n to ta k e a life .

CORE QUESTION What evidence does each writer use to support his claim? Who do you think makes the stronger argument? Why?

*A gun violence prevention groupJUNIOR.SCHOLASTIC.COM 23

Copyright of Junior Scholastic is the property of Scholastic Inc. and its content may not becopied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder'sexpress written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles forindividual use.