"In order to reduce gun vilolence in the U.S., there should be stricter gun regulation."
             Violence and crime in today's society is inevitable. Human nature is full of hatred, jealousy, and chaos. Throwing guns into the equation adds security for some, and vulnerability for others. Gun regulation is a topic of debate that has been going on for years and looks to be going on for many more to come. Although, each side of the issue seems to have a possibility of security for all, a healthy median of both sides proves to be hard to come by.
             On the side of no gun regulation, advocates explain that a concealed handgun provides safety, and that people who defend themselves (with guns) may indirectly benefit other citizens. Cab drivers and drug dealers who carry guns produce a benefit for cab drivers and drug dealers without guns (Lott 18). This theory seems like it could be quite effective, but it brings questions of whether drug dealers would even obey gun regulation laws if imposed, since they are already braking the law by dealing drugs. One might ask why do drug dealers need guns? The answer is quite simple, most violent acts are due to drug and alcohol abuse (Write 313).
             The ability to carry a concealed weapon provides safety to the insecure and vulnerable. Erika Schwartz (the first runner-up in the 1997 Miss America pageant) made her decision to carry a gun after becoming a victim of a carjacking. Other women carry a weapon due to their fear of rape. Laurence Rockefeller's reason to pack heat is because he carries large sums of money and feels that a gun will protect him from becoming a victim of a mugging (Lott 23).
             Advocates of no gun control say that the current gun regulation of a waiting period to help potential murders time to "cool off" is a total waste of time. Any one who leaves the scene of an argument, drives to a gun shop, buys a weapon, loads it with ammunition, and returns to kill the
             ...