Should any citizen around the world be able to carry firearms?

Can a person feel safe from crime no matter where they may go? In the Bill of Rights, the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads, A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed. So how does one interpret this? Some believe that it means only the people of the militia should be allowed to carry firearms, where some believe it means every citizen has the right to bear arms. Right now someone around the world is being a part of a violent crime whether it is the aggressor or the victim. How do we as citizens protect ourselves? Should we all be allowed to carry guns for self-defense or have guns around in the household? Even though many countries have implemented strict gun control laws, they have proven to not be as effective as law makers thought they would be in reducing crime. Gun control laws have been a big debate worldwide. Why do leaders of countries want to have gun control laws? Leaders believe that they can reduce the crime rate if they enforce laws about citizens owning guns. Whereas some countries believe that their citizens should be able to bear arms. What can countries do to reduce the crime? Most of the governing bodies worldwide believe getting some background knowledge of each citizen looking obtain a gun will help in making sure the person will be a responsible gun owner. Most of the countries, like the United States, require each citizen to have a background check done before they can purchase the fire arm. The citizens of most of the countries believe it is their right to bear arms. Most law-abiding citizens feel they are safer from criminals if they own a gun and can show that they can protect themselves. They believe if a criminal approaches them, they can show their weapon and the criminal would most likely just run the other direction. So the wide spread debate comes in by some citizens who believe in the right to bear arms, and those who believe that a person should not be allowed to own guns. There is the saying, Guns dont kill people, people kill people, this is where the citizens have such a huge debate. Some people believe that the presence of any guns out there is what keeps gun-related crimes so high. Truth of the matter is, crime is usually committed by those who obtain guns illegally. Many of the law-abiding citizens feel that if the were harsher punishment for those who commit crime, it would help to drop the violent crime rate. These citizens believe the harsher punishments for criminals would be more effective than stricter gun laws. There are different gun control laws around the world. Some countries have very strict gun control laws. Britain has brought in laws that have increasingly restricted firearm ownership by the general population. Britain banned all handguns in 1997. Britain introduced these strict laws after the Dunblane massacre in 1996 (Woolrich, 2000). Britains strict gun laws have proven to be a disaster. Criminals now obtain their guns illegally and the crime rate has gone up in Britain. Home invasions and thefts are a big hitter there, since the criminals know that the law-abiding citizens will not have a fire arm in their possession. This makes every citizen a target for being a victim in some means of a violent crime. Russia has one of the highest

crime rates in the world. When Russia was under the control of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the central Soviet government totally banned civilian handgun ownership. Today, even with handguns virtually unavailable to ordinary Russian citizens, the homicide rate remains high. Criminals in Russia are having no difficulty acquiring handguns and suitable ammunition (Kates, 1997). In Australia, after a tragic killing of 35 people by a maniac with a semi automatic weapon, the Prime Minister took away the rights of law-abiding citizens to carry legal firearms away. The crime rates involving firearms have not changed since the addition of this law. In Canada extensive background checks are conducted on every person who wants to acquire a firearm. In 2000, 1,287 firearms licenses had been refused or revoked for public safety reasons since the law came into effect in 1998. This is over ten times more revocations from potentially dangerous individuals than the total for the past five years. Out of Canadas background checks 653 new applications have been refused for public safety reasons and they have revoked 634 licenses to individuals who were no longer eligible. In the United States more than two thousand people die from gun-related injuries. The population groups most affected by these avoidable deaths are children and your adolescents. The misuses of firearms are not just a problem in the United States, but worldwide (James). The chart below gives a small comparison of some of the countries mentioned and where they fall in overall gun crimes, including suicides involving guns. In the United States a majority of the states have right-to-carry laws. In 1994 President Bill Clinton signed into law the Brady Bill. This law established a national 5 business day waiting period on handgun purchases through licensed dealers. This bill also required local authorities to conduct background checks on handgun purchases. In 1998 an amendment to the Brady Bill replaced the five business day waiting period with a national instant felon ID system. With this in place, dealers are required to conduct this background check on all gun purchases (Agresti, 1999). Crime in the United States seems to be higher than most countries, but shows in statistics that it ranges in the middle in comparisons with other countries. Israel has one of the lowest crime rates in the world. Israel has a greater availability of guns to their law-abiding citizens. In Switzerland it is required that every male over the age of 20 is required to own an assault rifle. Switzerland is found to be one of the safest countries. The citizens of the countries with less gun control laws do believe that the law-abiding citizens do no commit violent crimes. They believe that criminals will not obey the gun laws that are put in place and they will find any means possible to obtain the weapons that they choose. Governing bodies make most of the laws in each country. In the United States, the government makes a lot of the gun laws. In 2008, the Supreme Court made a landmark ruling upholding the right of individuals to bear arms for hunting and for self-defense. The debate over gun control laws even fall into Congress. A survey that was completed in 2008 showed that there were large differences between Republicans and Democrats. This survey reported that more than half of the Republicans have guns in their homes, while only a third of Democrats reported

this. The Democrats believe that there should be stricter laws while the Republicans are satisfied with the nations laws on guns. In Britain the British Politicians, both Conser-vative and Labour, have brought in laws that increasingly restricted the firearm ownership by the general population. The Prime Minister, John Howard, in Australia stated I hate guns, one of the things I dont admire about America is their slavish love of gunsWe do not want the American disease imported into Australia. He argued tougher laws would make Australia safer, which proved to be wrong. His decision to ban all firearms cost his government tons of money (Williams/Sydney, 2008). None of the countries researched showed that they give the citizens an actual vote on different gun control laws. Most of the laws that have been put in place in certain countries came after a violent gun rampage by an individual. In Canada anti-gun advocates challenged the Firearms Act in the Canadian Supreme Court. They argued that the Canadian Parliament did not have the constitutional power to enact parts of the Firearms Act. They wanted that responsibility for firearms control laws remain with the individual provinces. The debate on gun control throughout the world will probably never end. Do the citizens have the right to bear arms? Are the gun control laws good for the people of each country? The statistics show that crime seems to be lower in those countries with less gun control laws. The common criminal will probably always be able to get their guns through illegal means. There are so many different beliefs about owning guns and will probably always be a highly talked about subject. So, will school shootings and attempted robberies ever end? Are people ever going to feel truly safe from the crime that surrounds them? Will disarming the public reduce criminal violence in any country? Do we as a country feel we have the right to bear arms? Are gun control laws really the answer to reducing crime? There are so many questions that will probably never be answered in our lifetime; we can only hope that people will see the wrong in hurting each other.

References Agresti, James D. (1999, June10). Gun control Facts. Retrieved March 14, 2009, from Just Facts.com. http://justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp Encyclopedia of Public Health. Gun Control. Retrieved March 21, 2009, from Answers.com. http://www.answers.com/gun+control&r=67 James, Shane. (2009, April 5). Another Word on Gun Control from Down Under. Retrieved April 5, 2009, from LizMichael.com. http://www.lizmichael.com/australi.htm Kates, Don B. (1997, October. Gun Laws Around The World: Do They Work? The American Guardian. Retrieved April 5, 2009 from HRAILA.org. http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read.aspx?ID=72 Mauser, Dr. Gary A. (2001, May) Gun Control Around the World: Lessons to Learn. Retrieved from saf.org. http://www.saf.org/JFPP14ch5htm Williams/Sydney, Daniel. (2008, May 1) Australias Gun Laws: Little Effect.

Time.com. Retrieved April 5, 2009 from http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1736501,00.html?imw=Y Woolrich, Peter. (2000, May 3-16). Britains Tough Gun Control Laws Termed Total Failure. Free Republic.com. Retrieved April 5, 2009 from http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a39171442616c.htm

Stronger Gun Control? Gun Control? I shall present an argumentive paper on why I do not feel there should be stronger gun control laws. Guns do not kill. people kill. How many people do you know who have been physically assaulted by someone using a gun? In my forty-six years of life, I have not witnessed or know of this happening to anyone. I will give examples of the positive things guns are used. Therefore, I am against stronger gun control laws restricting law-abiding citizens from purchasing guns. Every law-abiding citizen should have the right to buy and own a gun. There are many ways a person can use and enjoy firearms. Some examples would be hunting for food to eat, hunting for trophy mounts, competitive shooting, and collecting of memorabilia. Hunting both wild and exotic animals is a form of recreation for the outdoorsman. The departments of wildlife regulate the kind and number of particular species that are allowable to harvest at a specific given time (Oklahoma Hunting Guide, 2009) By regulating, the department of wildlife can manage population of species. Owning a gun demands responsibility or your right to own a gun and hunt can be revoked (The Gun Owners Safety and Responsibility Ordinance, 2009). Outdoorsman use guns to hunt for food for their families. Animals such as deer and elk are low in fat. These animals eat off the land in which they live. These animals meat is better for us to eat as most processed meat from our stores that are loaded with preservatives. The trophy hunter primarily shoots for the mount (McLeods Trophy Hunts, 2008). These mounts are used as decorations in an office, home, or display in museums. The trophy hunters I know also utilize the meat themselves or donate to a service organization for the homeless. By donating food for someone to prepare for those less fortunate would classify a hunter as a good steward in our society. Competitive sport shooting is another popular activity for people that have guns. There are competitions for skeet shooting, trap shooting, and marksmanship shooting to name a few of the competitive activities for those who own firearms (Morez, Competitive Shooting, May 2009). Collecting guns from various wars and eras of time can be a very rewarding for a gun enthusiast. Collecting guns preserve our heritage and inform people of today of our early settlers. It also shows how modern technology has improved our firearms. Guns need to be Controlled More Guns need to be heavily controlled. There is no reason a person needs a gun. We have law

enforcement for protection; we have grocery stores to buy food, and we have competitive sports that do not require a gun. Citizens do not need a gun for protection (Siebert, Brian. St. Louis University Law Review, 1999). We have local, state, and federal law enforcement personnel to assist us with protection. Law enforcement people have training to assist citizens in time of need. There is no need for citizens to be running around with a firearm for protection. We do not live in the stone- age. Modern technology gives people access to emergency numbers to contact and a law enforcement officers are paid to respond and handle problems. Food is easily accessed at our local grocery stores to put food on peoples tables. Killing wild animals takes away of the beauty of enjoying our wildlife. Killing an animal to hang its head on the wall is in human. There are photographers who take pictures they can hang on their walls for decoration. Shooting of animals reflects cannibal times and in human acts from people. There are other ways to enjoy the outdoors besides the killing of animals and shooting of a gun for the sport of it. There is a variety of outdoors sports that a person can enjoy the great outdoors. Bird watching is an outdoor activity. Perhaps helping the department of wildlife count species in your area is an activity your entire family would enjoy. Too many times guns end up in the hand of criminals and those who want to commit terrible crimes. If there were stricter laws on guns there would be fewer unnecessary deaths of innocent people. We Do Not Need More Gun Laws Hunting wildlife is vital for our environment (Oklahoma Wildlife, 2009). If hunters were not allowed to reduce the population of wildlife we would be over populated with certain species. Currently, deer cause numerous vehicle accidents in areas where there are abundant of deer. Deer can be harmful to the farmer by eating the crop in which the farmer gets a yield from harvesting. We already have to make allowances in final figures due to open range deer populations. Too many deer reduce the number of cows a farmer can run on grass. Hunting of wildlife is important in many parts of the states to control the population. Shooting of animals for tr ophys for decorations in various places also aids the department of wildlife in controlling the population of wildlife so humans and animals can exists together. Both types of hunter are good stewards of not wasting the meat. The meat is generally used for themselves or is donated to someone who will utilize the meat. Shooting a gun competitively is a way for people to gather and social and fellowship with people who have the same interest. It also is a way a sharpshooter can make extra money for winning a competition. Responsible people who own guns are not the problem (www.handguncontrol.org.). People do not respect the law and do not have empathy for anything. People who want guns will get the guns no matter how many rules and regulations are put in place. The gun laws that are in place are sufficient for people to purchase a gun legally. A thief will get the guns and commit the crimes regardless of the laws. Perhaps stricter punishment for those who commit crimes with guns be more severe. It seem to many times a gun is used in a crime and the person pays a minimal fine and released back into the streets. I have never seen a gun kill anything; it is the person having the gun that kills people. Laws should be put in place to protect and ensure the person owning the firearm be responsible with their ownership. People should be allowed to own a gun with minimal restrictions to law-abiding citizens. Yes, I

believe there should be some guidelines in purchasing a firearm such as of legal age, personal background check to keep firearms out of the hands of known felons, and a waiting period before purchasing of handgun or automatic weapons. Law-abiding citizens will gladly wait to receive their purchase. The criminal, thief, or dishonest or mental person has a problem in waiting. Then they will go lie, cheat, or steal to get a gun to do what they think they need to do. People with responsibility, abide by the laws of the land should not be penalized for the bad people of this world. I have presented an argumentive paper reviewing why I do not feel there should be stronger gun control. I have never witnessed or know of anyone who has been assaulted by someone using a gun. The television and media are first to alert the public of the misuse of a gun. They do not report the good of someone shooting and giving away thousands of pounds of meat to needy families. They do not report the thousands of people who own guns and have not committed a crime. The gun or firearm has been the butt of needless and selfish crime. References Oklahoma Department of Wildlife. (2009) Hunting Guide. T. Burton, (1999). Nutrition Information on Venison. Legal Community Against Violence ( February 2009) The Gun Owners Safety and Responsibility Ordinance. McLeods Trophy Hunts, Fort Worth, Texas. 2009. Mroz, Ralph. Competitive Shooting. Dangerous Diversion or Practical Pastime. Police Officer Safety Association, May 5, 2009. City Lawsuits Against Gun Industry, Brian Siebel St. Louis Review, 1999. www.handguncontrol.org Gun Control Facts, James D. Agresti. Just fact, June10, 1999.

Since 1791, the debate has raged on. Who were the forefathers of this glorious nation referring to in the cherished Second Amendment? Who is responsible for making the decision? Regardless of either argument, this nation cannot ignore the facts: What has been done up to this point is not working. Every day the news is overrun with reports of yet another story involving gun-related crime, suicide, or violence. But do gun control regulations infringe on the rights and safety of American citizens? Some believe that things are fine the way they are, unchecked and free, whereas others argue that the world of firearms is too chaotic and off-balance to maintain a safe and civilized world. And though there have been slight attempts at restrictions, concerning everything from who can buy what type of gun to how they should store and handle them, the minor gun legislations in place are so full of loopholes that they are practically nonexistent. A new legislation to reduce gun related crimes and protect innocent citizens is needed because current gun control laws are too lax and ineffective. For example, gun control laws in the State of Ohio require an eligible citizen to obtain a permit only to carry a handgun, not to own one. No requirements are currently in place regarding registration or background checks for owning or purchasing any handgun, rifle, or shotgun

(Montaldo). Several laws exist regarding who may, have, carry, or use firearms, but without any laws regarding permits, registration, gun purchases, or ownership there will not be any way to prevent ineligible citizens from obtaining firearms. When a firearm is used in the commission of a crime, no way exists to trace unregistered guns back to their owners, unless the owner had a permit to carry it. In addition, there are many laws (which vary from state to state) regarding who can and cannot purchase guns, and opponents of gun control believe that they are an effective alternative to permits and registration. The map below shows permit and background check requirements for gun sales at gun shows by state.

(Bloomberg, 2009) Based on the information represented in the above illustration, one can infer that if an ineligible person cannot legally purchase a firearm in his or her own state, he or she can simply travel to another state and make a purchase. Laws consistent from one state to the next can prevent ineligible persons from legally purchasing guns in other states. Criminals will find a way to obtain guns because they do not adhere to laws but strict, uniform laws will make it more difficult for them to do so and will help to reduce the number of gun related crimes. International comparative statistics show that the United States (U.S.) has the highest gun mortality rate compared to 36 other high-to-upper-middle income countries (Legal Community Against Violence, 2010). The statistics are staggering. Every year in the U.S., more than 30,000 people die in gun-related crimes and accidents. That is more than 80 deaths each day and more than three deaths per hour. Additionally, more than 100,000 people are victims of gun violence each year (Legal Community Against Violence, 2010). Strict gun regulation could reduce these figures significantly. Even if opponents of gun control state that guns are necessary for hunting, defense, and sporting, no one can argue that certain types of guns are made primarily for the purpose of inflicting bodily harm, such as assault weapons. A 10-year federal ban on assault weapons expired in September 2004 (Assault Weapons, 2008), and the government has yet to renew the ban. In March 2009 Attorney General Eric Holder stated, "As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to re-institute the ban on the sale of assault weapons" (Miller, 2009). As of March 2010, the Obama administration has yet to implement any new regulations regarding assault weapons. Assault weapons, which include semi- and fully automatic weapons, are generally used for military purposes, and therefore cannot possibly fall under the categories of hunting or sporting. Supporters of the assault weapon ban state that the availability of assault weapons enables terrorism, and that they are not suitable for ownership by the public because they are used for killing, not for hunting or other sports (Assault Weapons, 2008). On the other hand, some argue that assault weapons can be used for self-defense and military reservist training, and that the previous ban served no purpose as it was flawed and ineffective. In fact, a legislative director from the Violence Policy Center stated the 1994 law in theory banned AK-47s, MAC-10s, UZIs, AR-15s and other assault weapons. Yet the gun industry easily

found ways around the law and most of these weapons are now sold in post-ban models virtually identical to the guns Congress sought to ban in 1994 (Seabrooks, 2009). However, something is better than nothing. Shown below is a display of several assault weapons in a display at a museum. (A visit to the Swiss military museum at Morges) Assault weapons are not the only type of guns that need to be controlled. Handguns, such as those issued to members of law enforcement, are primarily used for protection. However, in 1993, the National Crime Victimization Survey revealed that of all firearm-related crimes reported, 86% involved handguns (Zawitz, 1995). In addition, research conducted in the 1980s by Wright and Rossi revealed that most criminals choose to use handguns because they are easily concealable, large caliber, and well made (Zawitz, 1995). Though citizens in Ohio are encouraged to practice safe storage of firearms, it is only mandatory if a minor is living in the home and the firearm is proven to pose an immediate danger to them. Opponents of this type of gun control argue that it is impossible to enforce proper safe-storage laws without infringing on citizens privacy rights, but supporters rebuke with the fact that the same can be said about discovering other forms of child neglect and abuse. Are the privacy advocators suggesting that Americans give up on protecting children in this way also, because we cannot see everything that happens inside peoples homes? Ohio law does not require Americans to equip their fire-arms with safety features and only citizens who apply for a permit to carry a concealed weapon are required to pass an approved safety training course (Montaldo). School shootings are becoming so prominent in the news these days that some schools even conduct safety drills designed specifically for situations involving weapons. A U.S. Department of Education report during 1997 shows that 6,300 students were expelled from American schools after it was discovered they were carrying firearms (Freydis, 1999). Minors with easy access to weapons in their very own homes most commonly commit shootings, along with other gunrelated accidents (Zawitz, 1995). In October 2009, a second grader in Memphis, Tennessee was found to have brought a handgun to school (2nd grader brings loaded gun to Kate Bond elementary, 2009). No one was hurt, but the point is that a second grader had access to such a weapon. Incidents similar to this one occur all the time, though most do not end quite so civilly. Take the Columbine High School shooting, for instance; Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris were only seventeen years old on April 20, 1999, when they massacred twelve students and one teacher at their Colorado high school (Fatal Shootings That Took Place at U.S. Schools, 2007). Shown on the left are Klebold and Harris as they make their way through the schools cafeteria. (Chmielewski, 2010) And worse yet, there is the tragic shooting at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, VA. The Virginia Tech shooting occurred on April 16, 2007 and left thirty-three people dead and at least fifteen others wounded. This is considered to be the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history to date. Children and teens are not the only ones who can benefit from gun safety features. On the popular video sharing site, YouTube, there is an ironic clip of a police officer who, while giving a lecture on gun safety, accidently shoots himself in the foot (Police Officer shoots himself in the foot, 2009). When Congress ratified the Bill of Rights, what exactly did they mean when they said "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed?" (The United States Constitution, Amendment Two). For

several decades, a fierce debate on the meaning of this question has raged on. Some people believe that the Second Amendment guarantees all Americans the inalienable right to own guns and that the government regulation of guns and gun ownership is an infringement of our Constitutional rights; others that the Second Amendment was only meant to guarantee gun ownership to members of the military and that the government should strictly regulate guns and gun ownership. However, not everyone who has an opinion on the issue belongs to one of these two extremes. There exists an in-between group whose members believe that American citizens should have the right to own guns for purposes like protection, hunting, and sporting, but that modern society has changed much since 1791 and that gun regulation is now necessary to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people and to protect innocent lives. The regulations do not need to be extreme, but laws are necessary to prevent crimes like drive-by shootings, armed robberies, domestic violence shootings, and terrorism. Without them, how will we protect our communities from the horrors of school shootings, gang violence, and other tragic accidents? Most people do not take part in safe-handling education or equip their weapons with common safety features, such as trigger locks. Unless laws are passed to enforce such things, the average American citizen will not participate, leading to countless unnecessary deaths. It is a daunting task to persuade the extremists, so convinced that they are right, that gun control does not have to be all or none. However, it is not impossible. The burden of achieving a happy medium falls to the members of the remaining group, who need to stand up and speak out to those of the one way or no way mindset, along with the leaders of the American government. They must let it be known that there is an in-between and that if everyone could work together to create solid and fair gun control legislation, citizens could enjoy the right to own and use guns and still protect precious lives. References 2nd grader brings loaded gun to Kate Bond elementary. (2009, October 30). Retrieved March 10, 2010, from Action 5 wmctv.com: http://www.wmctv.com/global/story.asp?s=11410081%20 A visit to the Swiss military museum at Morges. (n.d.). Retrieved March 10, 2010, from Cybershooters: http://www.cybershooters.org/morges_museum.htm Assault Weapons. (2008). Retrieved February 6, 2010, from Issues & contoversies on file: http://140.234.1.9:8080/EPSessionID=7a8a83e0c95347a85d26cfcd7e24a5/EPHost=www 2facts.com/EPPath/icof_story.aspx?PIN=i0902320&term=gun+control Bloomberg, M. M. (2009, October). Gun Show Undercover. Report on Illegal Sales at Gun Shows . New York, New York, US. Chmielewski, D. (2010, January 25). Prank or Threat at Northwwod High School for Finals Week? Retrieved March 10, 2010, from TheLiberalOC.com: http://images.google.com/imgres? imgurl=http://christiandivine.files.wordpress.com/2009 /04/07-columbine-high-schoolmassacre.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.theliberaloc.com/2010/01/25/prank-or-threat-atnorthwood-high-school-for-finals-week/&usg=__OOijcR_zxOcCVj Fatal Shootings That Took Place at U.S. Schools. (2007, April 16). Retrieved March 10, 2010, from abc new/U.S.: http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3045893&page=1 Freydis. (1999). The School Shootings Report. Retrieved 28 2010, March, from Hololgy.com: http://www.holology.com/shooting.html Legal Community Against Violence. (2010). Retrieved March 10, 2010, from Gun Violence Statistics: http://www.lcav.org/resources/gun_violence_statistics.asp

Miller, J. R. (2009, March 17). Gun Advocates Ready for Battle on Federal Assault Weapons Ban. Retrieved March 25, 2010, from foxnews.com: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/17/gun-advocates-ready-battle-federal-assaultweapons- ban/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed %253A+foxnew s%252Flatest+(Text+-+Latest+Headlines) Montaldo, C. (n.d.). What are the Gun Laws in Ohio? Retrieved March 10, 2010, from About.com: http://crime.about.com/od/gunlawsbystate/a/gunlaws_oh.htm Police Officer shoots himself in the foot. (2009, September 1). Retrieved March 10, 2010, from YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2442_rmiidY Seabrooks, T. (2009, February 14). Why the Assault Weapons Ban is Boloney. Retrieved March 10, 2010, from Geek Politics: http://geekpolitics.com/assault_weapons_ban_is_baloney/ Second Amendment. (n.d.). Retrieved March 10, 2010, from U.S. Constitution.net: http://www.usconstitution.net/ Zawitz, M. W. (1995, July 9). Guns Used In Crime. Retrieved March 10, 2010, from Bureau of Justice Statistics: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/press/GUIC.PR