In the midst of his article, Charles M. Blow supplements his argument for stricter gun laws by examining and discussing major shootings in recent U.S. history. In introducing these acts of gun violence, he asserts his claim through the repetition of the phrase, “When we learned, to our great horror,” describing the context of a major shooting after each clause. After explaining the context of each instance, he emphasizes on the point that no significant government action was taken in any of these, thus prompting the nation to step further and further towards the decline of the debate on guns. At the end of this build up, Blow juxtaposes “the blood running through our streets” to the “increasingly unfettered right to bear arms,” proposing the…
Russ Shafer-Landau provides us with an article by Jeff McMahan in order to give us an analytical argument on gun control. Jeff McMahan, in his article Why Gun Control Isn’t Enough, discusses why he believes guns should not simply be controlled in the United States, rather they should be banned. McMahan makes the case that gun ownership, in its entirety, is dangerous and illogical. Through several examples and through his own reasoning, McMahan hopes to convince the reader that the only way forward on the topic of ‘guns’ in the United States is to completely ban civilians from owning traditional firearms, from the ground up. Through my counter-argument, I intend to show that while McMahan’s argument is versed well on intent, it is mostly normative,…
The article “Guns a Loaded Argument” by Paul Rosenzweig argues his interpretation of the popular controversy over gun laws in the United States. The author Paul Rosenzweig is an adjunct professor of law at George Mason University. He is also the senior legal research colleague in the Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation, the website in which the article is available. The Heritage Foundation is a research and informative institution that publicizes conservative policy topics that support the principle ideas that the foundation stands for. The author has written this article for a mainly conservative audience of readers to allow people more insight into the intricate issues of gun control.…
In this New York Times article Erik Eckholm uses mass shootings such as the Columbine, Virginia tech and Sandy Hook shootings to demonstrate the need for stricter gun laws. The writing of this article was sparked by the most recent shooting in Roseburg, Oregon. By using these tragedies along with very supportive statistics he is able to persuade the reader to believe that the current laws and restrictions simply are not enough. 90 people a day are killed by guns, two thirds of that statistic are suicides. This goes to show that Eckholm understands that sometimes “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.”…
With the law of guns having to be temporarily inoperable while not in use, D.C argued that this law did not prevent the use of guns for self-defense. Although they both agreed that the right to self-defense is necessary, D.C argued that a trigger lock would make a weapon accessible in about 3 seconds, so it wouldn’t prevent the owner from defending himself. “Heller’s attorney argued that reasonable gun control measures were available to the government but the ban on handguns was unconstitutional because it neglects the personal right to bear arms.”…
Guns and Gun Control. " NY Times. Nytimes.com, 20 Feb. 2013. Web. 22 Feb. 2013. .…
Roth concluded that “Several strategies may succeed in reducing gun murders, but rigorous evaluations are needed to ascertain their effectiveness. Among these are reducing firearm lethality (e.g., by banning certain types of ammunition), reducing unauthorized use (e.g., through combination locks on triggers, or sentence enhancements for burglary and fencing violations that involve guns), and educating the public about safe use and storage” (Roth, 2007). He concludes that not gun banning, but reform related to education and pursuing the criminality of illegal arms trade will curb gun violence in the United States. His overall conclusion from his findings is: “Where there is local support, priority should be given to three enforcement objectives: disrupting illegal gun markets; reducing juveniles ' access to guns; and close cooperation between the police and the community to set priorities and enforce laws” (Roth, 2007). Only by working together can the government and its citizens in the U.S. aim to curve violent crime.…
The controversy of guns is a never ending battle in both the political and social world. Although gun violence has been on a dramatic decline since the 1990’s more specifically from 725 people per 100,000 falling victim to gun violence in 1993 to a relative low of 175 in 2013. With this information, the question arises as to why do we care so much about guns now? Although individual crimes involving guns have decreased, the rate of mass shootings occurring in the United States is sending shivers down the spines of all Americans. Not one individual feels secure in the land of the free.…
Society has been split into two over whether or not guns should be banned, but there needs to be a solution where both parties can be happy. Anti-gun advocates present reasoning why guns should be banned. McMahan’s main two arguments of why guns should be banned: one, guns in the community creates a more dangerous environment; and two, the police have less of a power to protect citizens when society has guns (Shafer-Landau, The Ethical Life (EL) 390). McMahan explains that communities are not going to be free of crimes with more people carrying around guns, because criminals will be more prepared, efficient, and quicker to grab and shoot their target (Shafer-Landau, EL 392-392). People with guns will be safer than people without guns, because they do not have a gun to protect themselves.…
In the realm of the political spectrum, there are certain issues which hold more weight than others. For instance, the issue of individual responsibility. I believe that each person can decide his or her own fate, and that their circumstances do not define them. Furthermore, just because you are from a poor home with unsatisfactory conditions does not mean that you immediately have no opportunity to become something that your parents never were, as it is up to the individual to decide their own fate. They can choose to let it bring them down, or they can rise above the expectations.…
In the United States in more recent years there has been a lot of debate on gun control due to events like the most recent school shooting. Both sides, Democratic and Republican, have argued for and against two very radical solutions: increasing gun control to the point of taking away guns from everyone that is not military or police, and arming teachers across the country. While both of these solutions have their benefits and flaws, one very important aspect of the active shooter epidemic seems to be overlooked, and that is the mental state of these people that will eventually turn into active shooters. When looking at the mentality of these people, there are two parts of the issue that are rarely addressed when trying to find a solution,…
Guns Laws Must Be Changed The debate on new gun legislation at the federal and national levels is roaring topic in today’s American society. On one side of the argument, “gun lovers” constantly make mention of the second amendment and how the law protects the rights of Americans. On the other side of the argument, Americans expecting gun reforms argue new and clearer laws will be preferable for the future of America. Nevertheless, on both sides the truth of the matter is in the statistical evidence of gun violence and gun accessibility.…
Columnist Nicholas Kristof wrote an article titled “Our Blind Spot about Guns,” which was published in The New York Times in 2014. In the article’s context, he “argues that if guns and their owners were regulated in the same way that cars and their drivers are, thousands of lives could be saved each year” (Kristof 161). He incorporates multiple statistics in his essay, provides us with insights from the opposing side, and compares the issue of gun control to one that occurred a century ago: vehicle control. Just in the first two paragraphs, Kristof does not cease to use startling statistics that he is sure will grab our attention. He brings to light the issue of 1921 when vehicle regulations were non-existent which, therefore, contributed to the issue of high fatality rates.…
Argumentative “You can have all the gun control laws in the country, but if you don’t enforce them, people are gonna find a way to protect themselves. We need to recognize that bad people are doing bad things with these weapons. It’s not the law-abiding citizens, it’s not the person who uses it as a hobby” (Steele). There are around 100,000 victims of gun violence each year (“Brady Campaign...”). Action needs to be taken so Americans don’t feel unprotected going into a public environment.…
That not only will not decrease the number of criminals have guns, but also decrease the number of law-abiding citizens have guns, which make law-abiding citizens lose ability of self – protection. The more important thing is that sources of crime is the people’s thoughts and desires. Each of the shootings the killers was the person who shot, not the gun itself. The Government cannot simply rudely to solve this problem by the way of the gun ban. In the article “Just Take Away Their Guns”, James Q. Wilson wrote that “Our goal should not be the disarming of law-abiding citizens.…