"Has been a lifesaver so many times!"
- Catherine Rampell, student @ University of Washington
"Exactly the help I needed."
- Jennifer Hawes, student @ San Jose State
"The best place for brainstorming ideas."
- Michael Majchrowicz, student @ University of Kentucky
I strongly disagree with Proposition “G”. I believe that there are to many people with
guns as it is. Putting more guns on the streets will only make the death toll in cities and the entire
world in that matter higher and higher.
Proposition “G” says that anyone over the age of 18 that has no criminal record and/or no
mental history may legally carry a gun and make it known to people that they are caring a gun by
wearing the gun in a holster that is outside the clothes instead of under clothes where it is not
noticable. Just because a person does not have record of any past problems dealing with the
authorities and has no past known mental history it does not mean it is not there. It also does bot
mean the person is responsible enough to carry a gun. Some of the world’s most notorious
murders, rapists, and terrorists showed no sign of having anything wrong with them and have no
previous cirminal record of any kind. If we told people like this it is alright to carry a gun they
may end up with more victims.
Another reason I disagree with Proposition “G” is that people may handling problems the
wrong way. Instead of a person defending themselves with word, they could end up handling a
problem with guns. For example, if a person made a comment about another person behind their
back and it got bacl to the person who was being talked about taking the person who made the
comment off to the side and discussing the problem they may pull a gun on the person. If this
happens both parties in the situation may end up dead because a small simple problem that could
easily have been solved if the people in the situation acted mature ended up as a gun fight between
the people. If this is response that comes out of a pretty little situation that could have easily
been solved just think about what could happen if the situation was a serious one. A war between
families and communities could break out because of the fact that most of the people will have a
gun to protect themselves and they feel it is right to use it in more situations than they should. In
the long run a lot of people could end up dead because guns were to actively involved with the
solving of problems.
One of the last reasons I strongly disagree with Proposition “G” is that people may try to
become heros in hold-ups and robberies. For example, if a store, bank, or some other consumer
area is held up at gun point the consumers in the place may have a reaction of pulling their own
gun on the person robbing the place. If everyone in there pulls out their guns a lot people may
end up being killed that did not have to be if they would have just listened to the commands of the
gunman and let the police do their job instead of doing it for them. If the gunman ends up being
killed by one of the consumers the townspeople may brand him/her a “hero.” In reality the town’s
“hero” is just as wrong as the person who was robbing the store in the first place. It is just
another person adding to the hate in this world.
In conclusion, I strongly disagree with Proposition “G.” I believe that in the long run it
will only make cities and the world’s death toll higher and that the only people that should be
carrying a gun are the police
View Full Essay
Concealed carry in the United States, Licenses, Self-defense, United States firearms law, Government, Politics, Law
More Free Essays Like This