Our Blind Spot About Guns By Nick Kristof

In America guns have been a part of the country’s society since it’s birth. Throughout history the citizens of the US have used firearms to protect the nation, protect their families, hunt for food and engage in sporting activities. The issue of Guns and gun control is complex. Weighing the rights and liberties of the individual against the welfare and safety of the public has always been a precarious balancing act. In the United States, gun control is one of these tumultuous issues that has both sides firmly entrenched in their positions. Those parties in favor of gun ownership and the freedom to use and keep arms, rely on the fact that the provision for such rights is enshrined in their constitution. In this climate of

In “Our Blind Spot about Guns,” written by Nicholas Kristof, New York Times columnist states his belief on the regulation of cars and how it relates to the regulation of guns. In this article, Kristoff shows his stance of strongly believing that guns should be regulated as cars and their drivers are for a change and the saving of lives to occur. He states that before the combination of cars and guns killed more than 30,000 Americans every year. With all the car regulations in place, it is shown that there is one car fatality per 100 million miles driven. Due to these statistics, Kristoff believes that with gun regulation 10,000 lives could be saved. Before the regulation of cars, “…it became

In the essay, Blind spot about guns Nicholas Kristof disputes that if guns and the people who owns them were controlled in the same way that cars and the individuals who drives a vehicle, thousands of lives could be saved each year. Kristof also argues that regulating cars has made them more safer and that guns ought to be regulated the same way. He reinforced his argument with data non-fatality rates and the history of automobile and gun regulation in the united states

From the perspective of someone who has been on both sides of the political spectrum, King bluntly addresses the flaws in America's gun laws and effectively proposes reasonable solutions to lessen gun violence in the United States.

The two articles in this module were very interesting to read. Although the two presented many worthy arguments, Nicholas Kristof’s article “Our Blind Spot about Guns" seemed more persuasive. I believe this way because Kristof used a variety of facts to support his arguments, rather than Andrew Leonard who seemed to habitually use anecdotal evidence. The statistic argument regarding how many Americans would be dying annually because of vehicle accidents if it wasn’t because of regulations, caught my attention. The majority of his evidence was credible since he used statistical evidence and facts that occurred in the late 1800s and early 1900s. I also liked how he stated the history of automobile regulation as background information. The article

Sandy Hook Elementary. Aurora, Colorado. San Bernardino, California. Las Vegas, Nevada. Orlando, Florida. (Words with Negative Connotation) These are just some of the biggest mass shootings that have swept America in the past few years. Hundreds of lives are lost each year to gun related violence in the United States alone. Gun control has been a topic in our country since our founding fathers adopted the second amendment to the US constitution. Although recently controversy has sparked to an all-new extent in America due to the recent spike in mass shootings and gun related homicides. So many families and loves ones are affected each year in the United States because of gun related violence and other mass killing events, because of these events gun control laws need to be revamped and strengthened in American in order to protect the citizens.

Nicholas Kristof’s article, “Our Blind Spot About Guns,” argues that guns should be regulated just like cars are. In which he focuses that the problem is that there are many handguns with no regulations which it makes individuals unsafe. And overall, I agree with Kristof’s argument because guns should go through the same regulations we go for our cars. Also, because guns aren’t like cars that are visible, and making guns safer “smart guns.”

As it is well known gun violence is a major problem in today’s society, places like Chicago and New York City have a serious epidemic on their hands. It is not uncommon to hear about an incident where a gun was involved in these big cities on a day to day basis, but it’s not just the big cities, these type of things are happening nationwide. There has been an argument for many decades whether the cause of such violence is due to the lack of gun control laws or the restrictions put on firearms. Both sides of the isle will argue, the more liberal individual will tell you there is not enough while the conservative individual will tell you the laws put in place are too strict.

The issue of gun ownership and the argument for and against more laws to control gun ownership has been always very controversial. And, it seems that it is getting more and more serious with every school shooting or movie theater massacre in recent years. In his article “We the people confront Sandy Hook”, Semeiks is pointing out how the gun control measures have failed to pass again in Congress and explores the reasons behind that failure despite the fact that a very large number of Americans, including gun owners, support stronger gun control regulations. I find that this article brings out an interesting aspect behind the reluctance for stricter gun control laws: it is in the American

The term “gun control” deals with the regulation of the selling, purchasing, and using of firearms in America. The availability of firearms to the public has been causing serious debates around the country because of the diversity in the people’s cultures, judgment, and religions. Many people thought the provision set by the Second Amendment when it was ratified can perfectly be applied in the society today. However, the understanding of people about the Second Amendment and how they interpret it change over time. They cannot agree with each other about the meaning of the historical evidence (Karlan, 2013). Research and polls found that people in the rural areas tend to support the right of gun owners while those in urban areas encourage gun control. Due

Gun control in the United States is a very controversial topic in today’s political society, leaving the nation divided into two sides with two strongly opinionated beliefs. This all started with the increase in the amount of mass shootings and an overall increase in gun violence. The two sides consist of the liberal point of view and the conservative point of view. The liberals believe that the availability of firearms to the people in the country is a major issue, and that the U.S. government is at fault for the mass shootings due to the lenient regulations on guns. In retaliation, the conservatives argue that having a gun is a God given right, that the Second Amendment of The Constitution. Although the availability of guns is seen to be

In the United States, the media tends to only highlight violence that is occurring overseas when in reality gun violence has escalated to new heights in our own country. During recent years, gun-related homicides have plagued the United States, and many innocent citizens have been killed due to this accumulation of gun violence. Because gun control is a very controversial topic, writers who choose to address this emotional topic must use the appropriate tone when forming their arguments in order to better persuade their audience. Recently, Nicholas Kristof and President Obama

Over the past 20 years, a culmination of events has caused quite a stir in the United States. These events, which consist mostly of homicide on a mass scale, have caused a massive debate over our second amendment rights. Some people feel as if citizens’ rights pertaining to firearms need to be redefined to cater to the growing variety of weapons; while others feel as if such changes would infringe upon their rights as a citizen of the United States. While many people have a very strong opinion pertaining to the gun debate, others do not; the media plays a big role in influencing the undecided audience to one side or the other. When journalists discuss the gun debate, they use a wide variety of rhetorical devices to communicate their perspectives. The most common of these devices includes statistics, the subject of safety, persuasive language, and tone.

Gun control has a history dating back to 1791, when the Second Amendment of the Constitution was ratified. However, more recently, the debate over gun control has escalated into a much more public issue to which many citizens can relate. After all, stories about incidents involving guns appear frequently today in newspapers and on television or the radio. One could say that the debate started with the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968, which banned ownership of guns by certain groups of people and regulated the sale of guns. Since then, two main groups have gradually appeared: people who oppose strict federal

This shooting was the second-worst school shooting in U.S. history, and it was this shooting that reignited the inferno of debate known as gun controversy. The Newtown shooting, and the many others that followed, caused many people to view a gun solely as a symbol of murder. Americans shocked by the incident clamored for stricter gun control while other Americans protested the gun control, asserting that it was an infringement of their freedom. This battle still rages on today. Regarding the controversy, Robert J. Spitzer said, “At its heart, the gun debate is a question about the relationship between the citizen, the state’s power to regulate, and the maintenance of public order.” David Ropeik of Psychology Today went further, saying that the debate is more so about guns as symbols, not weapons. “The gun control fight is about our deeper need for safety and identity,” Ropeik wrote. These statements make clear the extreme significance guns hold in today’s society as a symbol of security. To restrict or attempt to eradicate guns is to misunderstand what a gun is, according to the over 60 million gun owners in the country that oppose gun