This is my topic selection: “Restricting Firearm Use among Young Adults Aged 18 to 25 Years: A Proposal Gun violence is one of the leading problems that affect the United States. In 2019 alone, approximately 39,773 people died from gun-related deaths. Out of this number, young people are overrepresented as both victims and perpetrators of violence. Many factors are attributed to the recent surge in youth gun violence, such as the unemployment crisis, increase in school dropout rates, and early exposure to violence. Other factors that have fueled the rise in gun violence among the youthful population include the spread of illegal drug groups and markets. This is particularly true for crack cocaine. More young adults are also recruited into such gang groups than other age groups, resulting in the practice of carrying weapons among them. Furthermore, Most of the mass shooting incidences reported in schools, universities, cinemas, and public places are carried out by young offenders. Introducing minimum age requirements for gun holding and purchase can significantly educe gun violence among young adults aged 18 to 25 years. Laws that impose minimum age requirements of the purchase or possession of firearms make it more difficult for underage or youthful people to acquire a firearm through formal channels. However, laws that require a minimum age of possession are meant to restrict the sale, transfer, or delivery of handguns to age groups that are generally regarded as mentally unfit to possess firearms (Gius, 2015). Under the current federal law, licensed dealers are barred from selling or delivering such weapons to people aged below 21 years or long guns to those under the age of 18. Unlicensed people cannot also sell, transfer, or deliver the weapons to individuals under the age of 18 years. With some exceptions, the law also bans people under the age of 18 from possessing guns but it does not place age restrictions on the possession of long guns. Since most gun-related violence occur among individuals aged 18 to 25, policymakers should increase the age limit to include such groups. Firearm-related homicides and violent crimes disproportionately affect people who are aged below 25 both as offenders and victims. Additionally, the arrest rates for violent crimes continue to peak for those within this age bracket. In 2016 for instance, 46 percent of the 8545 firearm homicides were perpetrated by people aged between 12 and 24 years although the group only constitutes 17 percent of the American population (Rand, 2018). By restricting youth access, age restrictions can significantly reduce the rates of firearm homicides, suicides, and unintentional shootings by the affected age group (Rand, 2018). Moreover, the relationship between firearm availability and suicide cases are strongest among adolescents and young adults. In 2017, for instance, American law enforcers reported a total of 3556 suicide deaths among people aged between 16 and 25 years, 47 percent of which involved firearms. The imposition of minimum age limits should target gun dealers. Most guns that are used to commit crime in the United States are sold by gun dealers located across different parts of the country. 14 percent of dealers, for instance, sell 92 percent of guns that are used to commit crime. In Baltimore, for instance, dealers situated within 20 miles sell 90 percent of the Maryland guns. Most youth who join criminal gangs and trafficking organizations often prefer handguns that are semiautomatic, medium to large caliber, which are easily concealable. These weapons have the potential to kill many people within a short period of time (Moore et al., 2016). Semiautomatic pistols generally have larger ammunition capacities than other handguns, and are more likely to be used in crime than other pistols. Therefore, barring the youth’s access to such weapons can significantly reduce firearm-related deaths in the United States. “References I used:
Gius, M. (2015). The impact of minimum age and child access prevention laws on firearm-related youth suicides and unintentional deaths. The Social Science Journal, 52(2), 168-175.Moore, M. D., & Bergner, C. M. (2016). The relationship between firearm ownership and violent crime. Justice Policy Journal, 13(1), 1-20.Rand. (2018). The effects of minimum age requirements. https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/minimum-age.html
Now I need someone to make an abstract with that information above, and more, with the rules mentioned below:
Single Spaced. “Justified” – meaning straight margins on each side. Make sure it fits on 1 page. It is easiest to just follow my wording from the template exactly. Divide into 3 paragraphs (1 per objective) at most.
Needs to be an abstract not an intro: A summary, condensed statement of what you proposal will cover. Besides giving an overview of the project, the Abstract must also “capture” the reader and motivate them to read further. Often in the professional/business and academic world, a poor abstract will mean your proposal does not get read. Avoid wordiness and too much information. Use simple, clear sentences. It’s supposed to be functional, not pretty. The Intro itself comes next…
Your abstract must have EACH of the following 3 facets, one paragraph for each facet:
(In case that’s not clear, WHACK THE READER OVER THE HEAD WITH THIS INFO. Don’t overload them; just deliver the basics.)
Example: Your abstract could be a paragraph that looks something like this (This is from a real academic article – it isn’t exactly what I want – WE ARE PROPOSING SPECIFIC changes clear up front, not just hinting that we will discuss them – but it should give you a good idea):
ASTRACT: Despite having the most costly health system in the world, the United States consistently underperforms on most dimensions of performance, relative to other countries. This report—an update to three earlier editions—includes data from seven countries and incorporates patients’ and physicians’ survey results on care experiences and ratings on dimensions of care. Compared with six other nations—Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom—the U.S. health care system ranks last or next-to-last on five dimensions of a high performance health system: quality, access, efficiency, equity, and healthy lives. This paper will evaluate the US on these comparative performance measures. The paper then proposes changes designed to rectify identified problems and areas for improvement. (but YOU need to give me the exact changes HERE.) Enactment of health reform legislation in the U.S. will start to address these problems by extending coverage to those without and helping to close gaps in coverage—leading to improved disease management, care coordination, and better outcomes over time.
This is sufficient – but divide into 3 paragraphs (1 per objective) at most.