Social movements

Students’ Name
Professors’ Name
Date
Gun Ownership
In this essay, the discussion of gun ownership or control as a social movement gets discussed as one of the options provided. The power of the purchase of firearms does not go against the rights of the constitution (Common Ground N.pag). There is a need to have a balance between the need for persons to own guns and the need for gun accountability in the community.
Principles of gun ownership
First, is the principle that protects the majority of the locals to possess guns as a reserve for the law-abiding ones that entail hunting, and self-protection. Secondly, there is the law that gives power to the federal and the state control of gun ownership that does not go against this right. The federal government has put in place principles that include a primary framework mechanism to prevent felons and persons with mental challenges from buying guns (Common Ground N.pag). Then, there is the restriction of the sale of arms to only those who intend to use them for hunting, self-protection, and shooting. It also plays a crucial role by keeping a check on the selling of guns. There are decisions explicitly left for the independent states that include the decision to allow or prevent people from carrying weapons that are not known or in the public and the need to undergo training or a specific duration before one can lawfully buy a gun.
These principles on the gun control lay the foundation for the gun ownership social movement allowing the citizens to have the right to own and use guns for specific purposes such as hunting and shooting.

They are also able to track guns used to commit crimes easily. It is true that every citizen is however entitled to the right to being safe in the public, schools, and even when home (Common Ground N.pag).
The pros and cons of gun ownership movements
The US citizens enjoy a lawful right to possess guns as the law allows them to keep guns without getting infringed. As an advantage is that gun ownership enables the citizens to protect themselves as criminal activities threaten them and the police security may not always be a guarantee (Watkins N.pag). The citizens are equally able to help them continue enjoying their traditions. The provision of strict gun control measures has seen many countries face reduced killings.
The shortfalls for gun control is that they do not adequately reduce the crime rates as the criminals shift to other forms of weapons. When the firearms ownership gets out of the law, it does not wholly prevent the criminals from getting the guns (Watkins N.pag). There is also negligible control in the manner the guns get sold that makes them easy to acquire. The arms have a higher chance to cause damage to the households than to the criminals. The guns are dangerous compared to other weapons, and that makes their ownership more hazardous than other weapons.
Completion of the movement effect on social structure
There will be an effect on social context with geographic divide when rural residents are advocating for gun ownership and urban ones being against it. Gender division will also happen as more men call for gun protection than the women (Chemerinsky 477) Opinion
There is a need to shift current energy from gun ownership regulation to include other forms of weapons and addressing the real costs that come with guns in society.

Works Cited
Chemerinsky, Erwin. “Keynote Address Putting the Gun Control Debate in Social Perspective.” Vol. 73, 2004, pp. 477–485., https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2141&context=faculty_scholarship.
Common Ground. Basic Principles for Lawful Ownership of Firearms. https://commongroundsolutions.org/topic/basic-principles-for-lawful-ownership-of-firearms/.
Watkins, Christine. “Gun Control: The Debate and Public Policy.” Public Works: The Legacy of the New Deal, www.socialstudies.org/sites/default/files/publications/se/6105/610502.html.