Imagine you are sitting in an office on a random Wednesday. You're thinking, “wow, I can't wait to get home today to see my family. It's killing me today. You've been doing this job since you graduated and you're less than five years away from retirement. Suddenly two armed men wearing masks burst into the office and order everyone to stand in the center of the office. Scared for your life, you only have seconds to react. Then you remember the gun you kept in your desk. You've always owned this gun, but you never thought the day would come when you'd have to use it. Instinct takes over at this point and you grab your gun and begin to silently make your way towards the front where the gunmen are being held. Then you see another of your colleagues with the same plan in mind. One and on the count of three, both of you jump out firing one shot each. Both gunmen immediately fell to the ground. Both lie motionless, most likely dead. 911 is then called and the situation is over. The sad reality of this situation, however, is that most Americans would never have the opportunity to resolve the situation in this way. According to the NRA, only 30-34% of American adults own a gun. Most Americans in this situation would find themselves stranded, defenseless, with two armed men threatening their lives. Gun control laws are necessary in some cases, but the United States must relax its gun laws to protect its citizens to the maximum extent. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The gun control debate is a very sensitive topic, with school shootings like Columbine and Sandy Hook and terrorist attacks like Paris in January and November it becomes part of everyday life. Even though there isn't a shooting every day, it sure feels like it. The country is divided in half, but it shouldn't be that way. While people say that the victims of Columbine and Sandy Hook would like to see guns abolished, my family has a very different perspective. My father grew up in Centennial, Colorado, and his sister and her four children still live there. My cousins ​​currently attend Columbine High School. Yes, Columbine which was the site of one of the first mass shootings in the United States. Even though my cousins ​​were not present at Columbine during the incident, my aunt and uncle remember that horrible day vividly. At the time they lived less than two miles from the school. They remembered hearing the shots and not knowing what was happening. They took refuge with their young children in their home. After that horrible day, the details came pouring in. After all the gun control debate, my aunt and uncle still stand by what they have always believed. If the teachers in that building had been armed with guns, the shooting would have been stopped in its tracks. Even though they currently have their children at Columbine and had friends who taught school on that horrible day, they continue to believe in guns. This logic, however, is not only shared by my family. Most of the people in that building that day believe that if some teachers had had guns in that building, this tragedy could have been avoided. There is also the argument that stricter gun laws would lower the murder rate and make the streets safer. Stricter gun laws would actually do nothing but take citizens andmake them more vulnerable to violent crime. Chicago is a great example of this. “In 1982, the city of Chicago instituted a handgun ban. This ban prohibited civilians from possessing firearms, except those registered with the city government before the law took effect” (Hunt vs. Daley). The law also required that anyone who owned a gun before this law had to re-register their gun every two years or the owner would lose the right to own the gun. Common sense would say that after this law, homicides in Chicago would drastically decrease. Guns don't exist in Chicago. However, it is exactly the opposite. “Since Chicago's gun ban began, the homicide rate in Chicago has averaged 17% lower than before the law took effect, while the U.S. homicide rate has averaged lower by 25%” (Chicago Police Department). Although Chicago's gun ban lowered the homicide rate, it lowered the homicide rate less than the national average. While Chicago got worse when it banned guns, most states become safer when they allow their citizens to carry guns. According to John R. Lott, Jr., PhD, author of More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws:States with the largest increases in gun ownership also have the largest declines in violent crime… The effect say "Enacting" concealed weapons laws for these crimes where two or more people were killed was dramatic. When states passed these laws, the number of multi-fatal shootings decreased by 84%. Deaths caused by these shootings have fallen by an average of 90% and injuries by 82% (Lott Jr). Three states that best exemplify this phenomenon are Texas, Michigan, and Florida. They instituted right-of-carry laws in three different decades, but achieved the same general result. On July 1, 2001, Michigan's right-to-carry law went into effect. “Since the enactment of Michigan's right-to-carry law, the homicide rate in Michigan has averaged 4 percent lower than before the law took effect, while the U.S. homicide rate has been on average 2% lower” (FBI). Even if it's not a huge drop, it's still a drop. Texas implemented its right-to-carry law in January 1996 and had a very similar outcome to Michigan's. “Since the right-to-carry law went into effect in Texas, the homicide rate in Texas has averaged 30 percent lower than before the law went into effect, while the homicide rate in the United States has been in average lower than 28%” (FBI). The next and best example of the effects of gun ownership is found in the state of Florida. “On October 1, 1987, Florida's right-to-carry law went into effect. This law requires concealed carry licensees to be at least 21 years of age, have a clean criminal or mental health record, and complete a firearms training/safety course. Since the right-to-carry law went into effect in Florida, the homicide rate in Florida has averaged 36% lower than before the law went into effect, while the U.S. homicide rate has been in average lower than 15%” (FBI). This is a truly staggering number. Florida's homicide rate averaged 20% lower than the rest of the United States. A simple law, however, will not change the murder rate. Gun laws only work if people step forward and choose to own a legal gun. If you look at gun ownership in Texas and Florida, you understand how the murder rate has gone down. InTexas, where the murder rate was 2 percent lower than the national average, very few people owned guns. “In 2009, Texas had 402,914 active licensees, making up approximately 2.4% of the state's population age 21 and older” (U.S. Census Bureau). Florida, however, has nearly double the number of gun owners. “As of July 31, 2010, Florida had 746,430 active licensees, constituting approximately 5.4 percent of the state's population age 21 and older” (U.S. Census Bureau). Although it is argued today that more guns will result in more murders, Florida and Texas show a very different side. The gun control debate isn't just raging in the United States. With the ever-increasing threat of terrorism, be it domestic or international, countries are beginning to take a stand on gun violence. Most countries take a strong stand against firearms, but have not achieved the desired results from these strict laws. Mexico is the best example of this because it has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world. According to a 2012 New York Times article: Mexico has one gun shop across the country... Mexico's gun shop is located on a secure military base and customers must present a valid ID, pass through a metal detector and hand over cell phones and cameras to guards. To actually purchase a gun, customers must show proof of honest income, provide references, pass a criminal background check, demonstrate that all military duties have been completed honorably, and be fingerprinted and photographed. If it is allowed to purchase a gun, the customer can only purchase a gun and a box of bullets (Cave). Common sense would tell you that Mexico is one of the safest countries in the world. It is nearly impossible to acquire a gun legally, so gun homicides must be few and far between. Unfortunately this is not the case. According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), in 2012, Mexico had 11,309 gun homicides compared to the United States which had 9,146” (UNODC). While this doesn't seem like a huge difference, gun homicides per capita tell a very different story. Mexico had 9.97 gun homicides per 100,000 people, while the United States had only 2.97 per 100,000 people. Even though it is nearly impossible to buy a gun in Mexico, the number of murders per capita is three times higher than in the United States. The gun control debate doesn't just affect domestic violence. While most of the debate focuses on the domestic side of gun violence, many lose sight of a much bigger, much stronger, and much more dangerous threat. That threat is radical Islamic groups. These groups, like ISIS, hate the West with everything they have. These people will do anything to destroy the West. If we take away guns from our citizens, terrorist groups will have a much better chance of inflicting damage. Recent events over the last three years in France have shown that the threat is much greater than we can ever understand. A great example of gun laws not containing radical Islam was the March 6 attack. On March 1, 2012, France tightened its gun laws once again. Five days after these laws went into effect, a French jihadist shot and killed seven people. The shooting ended only when a police sniper eliminated him. The most horrific and recent example of gun laws not working was the Friday the 13th attack in Paris. The scene is best described by Julian Pearce, a journalist who was in the concert hall at the time..