It seems as if there are more and more shootings taking place in the United States. It does not seem to matter whether police officers are involved or not, when you turn on the television a shooting has become the latest “breaking news” event. These events that have recently been taking place are causing yet another large debate on gun laws to stir up controversy and now boil over once again. You have one side that wants to make new, and even more strict laws reducing and even banning guns, while the other side believes that you should be able to protect yourself from any danger, but more importantly because it is in one’s Second Amendment rights to bear arms.
Both sides of this argument are easy to defend. For instance, making a firearm even harder to obtain may reduce the amount of mass shooting and police shootings. Having a stricter policy with gun control can possibly reduce those who may be mentally unfit to possess a firearm. Once a tragedy occurs, it is quite easy to say that we need stricter laws for obtaining a firearm.
On the other side of the debate, there is the argument that if one was able to own a gun, it could prevent an incident such as a mass shooting from happening. By owning a gun, one may feel more secure and protected than someone who does not own a firearm. With the other side wanting to make a stricter policy to reduce guns, many will argue that it is a violation of their constitutional rights.
Personally, I believe that we should have the right to own a rifle for hunting, and handguns as well, but I see no reason as to why anyone would need an Ak-47. I do believe that every person, no matter if they ever even want to own a gun or not, should be mandated to take a gun safety course. The course will inform everyone on gun safety and also how to properly use a firearm. You never know when you may need to know how to use a gun.