How far should gun control go before it’s too much?

Kyle Kisthardt

Staff Reporter

The National Rifle Association is America’s longest-standing civil rights organization; it was founded in 1897.

While researching, I discovered a large amount of discourse over gun laws and their effectiveness. One such Arizona law, provided by Gifford law centers, says, “Arizona has no law requiring firearms dealers to initiate background checks prior to transferring a firearm.” With this, we allow violent offenders legal access to guns. The current law in the state of Arizona is that if you have commited a felony, you cannot own a gun, but without background checks, this law is useless.

I believe, within the state of Arizona, we need more extensive background checks. With their help, it would be possible to ascertain that anyone with a prior conviction will not be able to attain a firearm.

Furthermore, private gun sales should be limited, perhaps with a program to keep guns out of the hands of the wrong people.

While researching, I came across cases of domestic violence and observed the repercussions of such a heinous crime. As said by Gaxiola Law Group, a prestigious law firm with multiple awards of top Valley lawyers in Phoenix, “If you own a firearm, this privilege may be revoked.” As this is a proper punishment, the privilege may be revoked, but this also means it may not. This makes me concerned that violent spouses can get access to a gun.

This raises the danger for spouses who are afraid to speak, or even those who do, and thus trigger a violent spouse.

I am a supporter of the Second Amendment. In contrast, I see statistics such as, “an estimated 22% of US gun owners got their most recent firearm without a background check,” and it makes me question the integrity of what is supposed to be keeping our community safe.