The Weapon control in the United States of America

 In only one day, two big shots incidents shook the American nation, in practice of baseball of the Congress in Virginia, and an UPS installation in San Francisco both turned into the configuration of the armed violence.

These two Wednesdays incidents are another contribution to the account of massive executions in the United States.

The shooting they took quickly to the calls for a major weapon control. The Americans have listened to this type of calls earlier: After every massive shooting, the debate on the weapon and the armed violence you run away once again. Perhaps some accounts interfered. The critics answer with the worry of which the government is trying to take its weapon from him. The debate positions. Since even while the United States keeps on experiencing violence levels armed without equal in the rest of the developed world, anything happens - there are no laws they are approved by the Congress, nothing significant is done to try to avoid that next terror.

 It has become an American routine.

Why is it that for the whole affront and the duel with every massive shooting, nothing seems to change? To understand that, it is important to understand not only the impressive statistics on the possession of weapon and the violence armed in the United States, but the very singular relation of the United States with firearms - in contrast to that of any other developed country - and how one plays in our politics to make sure, seemingly against any prognosis, that our culture and the laws keep on impelling the violence of the weapon routine that marks the American life. 

1-  Problem of weapon in the United States is completely unique on world.

No other developed country of the world has not of far the same speed of the violence armed like America. Canada has the USA almost six times the valuation of murder as weapon, more of seven times like Sweden, and almost 16 times more Germany, according to information of the UNO compiled by The Guardian. (These deaths for weapon are a big reason the United States has a murders valuation in general much higher, what includes the deaths not - gun, that other developed nations).

photo by:   Javier Zarracina / Vox 

To understand why this is, there is another important fact: The United States has, with much, the biggest number of firearms of private ownership in the world. Estimated in the year 2007, the number of firearms of property of civil in the USA was 88. 8 weapon for every 100 persons, what means that it was almost a private ownership weapon for America and more of one for American adult. the second country of the ranking of the world was Yemen, the almost frustrated state torn by the civil war, where there was 54. 8 weapon for every 100 persons.

Another way of looking that: the Americans represent about 4,43 per cent of the world population, nevertheless, it possesses approximately 42 per cent of all the firearms of deprive you ownership of the world.

                   
                                                                          Research center Pew 

These three basic facts demonstrate the only culture it arms of the United States. There is a very strong interrelation between the weapon possession and the armed violence - a relation that the investigators support is at least partly causal. And the American property of weapon is beyond any other thing in the world. At the same time, this weapon concentrates between a passionate minority, which they are normally the strongest critics against any form of control of weapon and which frighten to the legislators to be voted against such measurements.

2) More weapon it means more deaths for weapon.

The investigation on this topic is extremely clear. It does not import how it looks for itself at the information, more weapon it means more deaths for weapon. 

This is clear when we concentrate on the information of the state for the state inside the United States, since this letter of the mother Jones demonstrates:

And it is clear when it looks at the information across the developed nations, as this another letter for Tewksbury Lab shows:

The opponents of control of weapon tend to point at other factors to explain the unusual armed violence of the United States: the mental illness, for example. Jonathan Metzl, an expert in mental health in the University of Vanderbilt, said to me that this is not only the case. The persons with mental illnesses are more inclined to be victims, not authors, of violence. And although it is true that an extraordinary quantity of the knobs of masses (up to 60 per cent) they have some type of psychiatric or psychological symptoms, Metzl points out that other factors are much better predictores of the armed violence in general: the alcohol and the undue use of drugs, the poverty, the history of the violence, and, yes, the access to the weapon. 

Another argument that sometimes is heard is that these shots would happen with less frequency if the people moreover they had firearms, for what it allows them to defend itself from the shots. 

But, again, the information shows this simply it is not true. the valuations of property of high weapon do not reduce the deaths for weapon, but rather they tend to coincide with the deaths increase for weapon. While some persons in some cases they can use a gun to defend himself successfully the same oa others, the firearms proliferation seems to cause a lot of more violence of what it prevents.

The experts believe extensively that this is the consequence of the laws of the United States they relaxed and guns of culture that surrounds us: Doing means more more accessible weapon more weapon and more weapon it means more deaths. The investigators have thought that this is true not only with the murders, but also with the suicides, the domestic violence, and even the violence against the police. To face to these problems, the United States will have not only to do weapon less accessible, but it is probable that to reduce the number of weapon in the USA also.

3) The Americans tend to support measurements to restrict the weapon, but that is not translated in laws.

If you ask the Americans how they feel about the specific measurements of control of weapon, which often say that they support them. In accordance with the surveys of Pew Research Center, most of the people at the bottom of support of the USA checks, prohibition of weapon of type I assault, prohibition of loaders of ammunitions of high capacity, prohibitions of sales in ammunitions line, and a federal database to realize a pursuit of the sales of weapon.

                                                            

Then: why are you ever measured to go so far as to turn into law? That is because they meet another political question: the Americans, increasingly, tend to support the abstract idea of the right to possess weapon.

This is a part of how the opponents of control of weapon are capable of killing even to a legislation than of introducing the most popular, such measurements as the cross-check of precedents that include the private sales (that have 85 per cent of support, according to Pew): They are capable of painting the portrait of the law for being opposite to the right to possess firearms, and to galvanize a reaction in its against.

5) Other developed country has had big successes under control of weapon

In 1996, a 28-year-old age man, entered a coffee of Port Arthur, Australia, one ate the lunch, extracted a semiautomatic rifle of its bag, and opened fire against the multitude, killing 35 persons and hurting 23 more. It was the worst massive shooting in the history of Australia. 

Australian legislators answered with a new legislation that, between other dispositions, prohibits certain types of firearms, like rifles and automatic and semiautomatic shotguns. The Australian government confiscated 650. 000 of this weapon across a program of buy of weapon, in which he has acquired firearms of the owners of weapon. There was established a record of all the weapon of property in the country and it needs a permission for all the new firearms buys. (This is much further of the invoices normally they propose in the USA, which hardly ever a serious attempt does to itself immediately to reduce the number of weapon in the country). 

The result: valuation of murders of firearm of Australia diminished in 42 per cent in seven years after the approved law, and its valuation of suicides firearm diminished in 57 per cent, according to a review of the tests for the Harvard investigators. 

It is difficult to know with certainty what part of the fall of the murders and suicides was caused specially by the program of buy of weapon. Deaths for weapon of Australia for his part, were already diminishing before approved the law. But the investigators David Hemenway and Mary Vriniotis argue that the program of very probable buy of weapon played a role: "First of all, the fall of the deaths for firearm was bigger between the type of firearms more affected by the repurchase Secondly, the deaths for firearms in the states with top repurchase valuations. per capita it diminished proportionally more than in the states with the lowest repurchase valuations".

A study of the program, for Australian investigators, found that the repurchase of 3. 500 firearms for every 100. 000 persons correlated with up to a fall of 50 per cent of the murders for firearm, and a 74 per cent fall in the suicides with weapon. As Vox Dylan Matthews indicated, the fall of the murders was not as per statistics significant. But the fall of the suicides more definitely was - and the results are surprising.

conclusion

This way, while the politicians often reston executions in mass to ask for theweapon control, the problem goes muchfurther of these incidents. Although it isdifficult to criticize for treating; executions in mass, after everything, the force of the Americans to face to thenumber of our laws of weapon andculture of the weapon. 

But it seems that we, as nation they arenot simply ready to look, or otherwisenot it sufficiently is imported by what wesee, when these events take place. Eventhe massive shooting of 2012 to SandyHook in the primary school, in Newtown, Connecticut - in which an armed mankilled 20 small children, six personnel ofthe school, and he itself - catalizada nosignificant change in the federal leveland most of the states. Since then, morethan 1. 300 executions have taken place, according to some estimations, in mass. And there are many reasons to believethat there will be more for coming. 

Do you like this article ? Follow  and Upvote please.