Comedian Jimmy Kimmel : The Uses Of Mass Shootings

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

When the constitution was written, nobody, not even the founders thought that the nation would survive. In his article “Gun-Control Foes

The United States contains 5% of the world’s population. However, our nation covers 35-50% of the world’s civilian-owned guns, is ranked first for firearms per capita, and holds the highest homicide rate among all other nations of wealth and democracy at 88.5% (Masters). Such high rates and loose restrictions are bound to lead to tragedy. We will not sit here and make excuses, we will not allow power in the hands of insanity, and we will not allow the safety of our children to be hindered. After each tragedy that has struck, we have failed to successfully improve gun control. As of now, we hold no federal law banning semi-automatic assault weapons, just like the weapons used in the Las Vegas massacre, resulting in

It appears as though the repetitive and unfortunate tragedies of mass shootings have become incorporated into the everyday life of American culture. We are forced to live in a heightened degree of fear, skepticism, and hesitation concerning our public safety. This phenomenon could reasonably occur in response to the vast ineffectiveness of the country’s current gun laws. Time after time similar misfortunes arise, yet few major changes are implemented to prevent them from reoccurring in the future. We cannot let this trend continue any further. Though some claim that increased gun control is useless and infringes upon the Second Amendment, it limits civilians’ weapons grade, obstructs those deemed unfit to wield such lethal weapons, and insures a greater level of security, thus it should be executed.

This discussion addressed the 2nd amendment in relation to the 21st century. Considering the most recent attacks on society, this issue is being highly addressed throughout America, and this discussion follows just that. Throughout this event, the speakers analyze the words behind the 2nd amendment, described the increase in police brutality in relationship to guns, and illustrates the connection guns have in history.

​In his book ‘Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America,’ Wrinkler tried to present an unbiased view towards the second amendment in the light of historical events and landmark cases that has tried to challenge or obtain the court’s interpretation. One of such cases is the ‘District of Columbia v. Heller’ case, which was argued and decided in 2008 (Supreme Court of the United States). For several instances, the provision in the Second Amendment that pertains to the right of an individual to bear arms has been contested. In fact, the clause, which states that “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”, is perhaps the most misconstrued clause in the American constitution (Supreme Court of the United States). Adding to the significance of this highly debatable clause is the fact that a flurry of gun related incidences has happened in the United States in the past that has taken many lives including that of children. Among the most significant authors that has attempted to answer the question or at least laid out the possibilities regarding the second amendment is Adam Wrinkler. In light of Winkler’s arguments as well as with other sources, this paper will examine the historical

Another article looks at the Tucson shooting where six individuals were killed as an example (Kaveny, 2016). While the author agrees that the constitution protects the rights of gun owners, she makes the argument that semiautomatic weapons were not what the founding fathers had in mind though and that these type of weapons should not be allowed to be owned by the public (Kaveny, 2016). The author also believes that it would be beneficial to have to obtain a license to own firearms and to purchase insurance for possible damages along with further funding for mental health patients to help keep these mass shootings from happening again (Kaveny, 2016).

The debate over stricter gun laws has been ongoing in the United States for quite some time now. Individuals who oppose stricter gun control laws argue that the second amendment to the constitution of the United States constitute part of the bill of rights that protect the right of American citizens to bear arms, and any attempt to set up laws for gun control will be a direct violation of this (Hofstadter 10). They argue that the primary purpose of the amendment was to ensure that American Citizens had the capability to protect themselves against criminal activities and defend the country against external aggression. From a personal perspective, the recent surge in instances of gun violence in the United States of America indicates that stricter gun control laws are necessary for the safety of the American citizenry. Thus, this paper is going to focus on highlighting the benefits of more stringent gun control laws and why members of the public should support it.

In light of the stereotyped, yet nonetheless accurate, obsession of firearms that the American people proudly uphold, restricting the use of guns proves to be a much more difficult feat than one would have you believe. “America 's pervasive gun culture stems in part from its colonial history, revolutionary roots, frontier expansion, and the Second Amendment”.

The article “Treasure the Second Amendment, but Ban Assault Rifles” discovered on Opposing Viewpoints was originally published at NewsMax.com, and authored by Judith Miller. The title suggests a forthcoming article in which the current interpretation of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution is expressly valid, but will present an argument for the banning of Assault Rifles. However, this article provides no evidence or statistics to show how an assault weapon ban might have success, but instead, argues it's position by bemoaning apathetic past and current presidents, detailing several horrific tragedies seemingly attributed to the expiration of the previous ban, and singling out a specific assault weapon, but fails establish a legitimate argument against Assault Rifles.

To offer an explanation as to how America got to this “barbaric stage”, an animated short, courtesy of Matt Stone is played, which takes a satirical approach to the story of America’s gun laws. The general idea put across from this segment is that America’s obsession with guns has transpired from a fear of the black man; where it even went as far to suggest that the KKK negotiated with the NRA to restrict black people’s possession of a firearm. Moore then proposes that this fear has appeared in many different forms, and that of which has been orchestrated by the government and large corporations to boost consumerism. A hypothesis like this does seem plausible, however there is no tangible evidence to reinforce this claim, just a lot of emotional appeal.

Guns are one of the most controversial and debated-upon topics in America today. In the Constitution, Americans are given “the right to bear arms,” and many Americans are proud of and believe strongly in that right. Though, that right has been constantly misused. Homicides by gun are at a higher rate in the United States than any other country in the world, mass shootings are at an all time high (many of which have occurred in the past two years alone), and terrorism has been at an all-time high. So, naturally, it is a topic that needs to be discussed. In the articles Change Your Gun Laws, America (1), author Fareed Zakaria provides the readers with some harrowing statistics on guns and insight over how the U.S. laws on guns need to be managed.

Franken was also able to downplay the usefulness of a firearm by including a series of sarcastic tips for tragedy in a home. For example, “1. Keep the gun loaded… 2. Put the gun in an unlocked drawer... 3. Rest assured.”1 Where Franken’s article comes up short is the use of hypothetical numbers to exaggerate and intensify the deadliness of guns. His sarcasm adds diversity to his piece, but should be used sparingly. Franken’s conclusion causes his argument to lose its effectiveness, after building his case it just seems ridiculous and out of place.

Former President Barack Obama performed a speech in response to a mass shooting that happened in a community college in Oregon. This speech included other gun related incidents which occurred during his time in office in 2015 regarding Umpqua Community College and Roseburg. After giving his condolences and love to those who felt loss in their hearts, Obama gave a powerful argument regarding gun control and how we, as Americans, should fight and strive for better gun laws. While Obama gave a moving speech, I could not help but feel it fell short in its argument while conducting a thorough critique. Obama appealed to his audience utilizing pathos and ethos with ease but fell short for those in the audience looking for logos or specific facts within his performance. I will be taking this opportunity to delve further into an analysis of this speech and both its heights and pitfalls.

As Boss (2017) mentions, The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution 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” (p. 164). Gun control has always been a controversial issue. Due to shootings related to culture, schools, robberies, movie theatres, and accidents, guns have become an object of violence, fear, and danger. All people have been affected by gun violence or have heard of an event related to gun violence. The two articles that will be analyzed are Erik Gilbert’s “Stop Worrying About Guns in the Classroom. They’re Already Here” and a testimony by Mark Kelly “Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Gun Violence on Gun Violence on January 30, 2013”. After comparing arguments through different premises from both articles, one essay will be chosen superior to the other.