Gun Control In America

The following critical analysis of the Essay, “The Second Amendment and the Right to Bear Arms” by Lee Professor of Law at William and Mary Law School, William Van Alstyne, is intended to highlight a few of the different short-comings and argumentative fallacies presented by even the most legally astute individuals who oppose forms of gun control. While the author does present a multi-facet and well-orchestrated presentation of fact and principle, there are two essential claims being asserted on his part. The author’s intent is to demonstrate the importance of gun right protection and to justify the NRA’s practices in the name of doing so. In my dissection of the essay, I intend to demonstrate the argumentative fallacies and examine the ways in which the NRA is generally harmful to the progression of gun control reform, and therefore public safety in the United

Gun control is an extremely controversial issue in the United States, and the debates around this topic has started many decades ago. According to the article “Gun Rights vs. Gun control” by Brianna Gurciullo, these debates are fueled by the people who defend the gun rights and the people who advocate in favor of gun control. It has been difficult to prove that gun ownership is directly related to an increase in violence due to the fact that researches tend to disagree on the impact of gun ownership in the American society. These debates tend to be brought to the spotlight whenever there is a mass shooting in the United States, which according to Abbey Oldham, who is a reporter from the PBS News Hour, happens quite frequently. However, organizations, such as the National Rifle Association (NRA), defend that the laws for gun control violate the Second Amendment of the constitution, which states “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” stated Gurciullo. Due to the distinct interpretations of the constitution and the difficulty to agree on the best approach to tackle the issue, this controversy seem to be almost unsolvable.

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

“Legal restraints on the lawful purchase of guns will have little effect on the legal use of guns” (pg.125). Author James Q. Wilson, a professor of management and public policy at the University of California in Los Angeles writes the article “Just Take Away Their Guns” to provide the American public with evidence of why taking away their guns will have little effect on crime in the United States. “Just Take Away Their Guns” was published into the New York Times Magazine in March, 1994. Professor Wilson, author of many books such as “Thinking about Crime,” “Bureaucracy,” “The Moral Sense,” and “Moral Judgment” uses statistics to advocate for perspective on gun control. The article not only addresses the use of guns but also provides a lot of textual evidence to support the author’s claims related to legal restraints on lawful purchases of guns. Firearms present in the homes of American citizens, while potentially dangerous, provide these citizens with a sense of security.

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.

Gun ownership is embedded in the fabric of America. The United States has the highest gun ownership rate in the world with 88 guns per 100 people. This is a staggering amount of firearms in the U.S. which our forefathers would 've never imagined when writing the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd Amendment 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.” Not everyone interprets this right the same way. Regulating and restricting the use of these firearms brings up opposing sentiments from those in favor of gun control and those who oppose

Gun violence has been a massive issue through the modern age of humanity and has created a sense of division regarding the solution to this epidemic. In Adam Gopnik’s essay “Shootings”, Gopnik addresses the issue of gun violence and demands a change in American government policy to prevent the tragic killings of innocent lives. Gopnik harnesses the tool of emotion and passion to drive his essay. In Charles Cooke’s essay “Gun Control Dishonesty”, Cooke takes the polar opposite of Gopnik’s approach by utilizing factual evidence to prove the futility of gun control.

The debate over gun control has been raging through the American political systems for years. On one side, there is the National Rifle Association (NRA) and 2nd Amendment-citing citizens who use their firearms for hunting and self-defense. On the other, there is Handgun Control Inc. (HCI) and followers of the Brady Campaign who want to ban guns on the basis that they are dangerous. Both sides have strong arguments, anchored in historical precedent and statistical analysis. Anti-gun control lobbyists’ arguments include the guarantee of the 2nd Amendment, the definition of “militia” as any adult male, self-defense, the relative uselessness of permits and regulations, and court cases in favor of firearm possession. Pro-gun control activists

The arguments of the anti-gun lobby are generally based on so-called "common-sense" and emotional pleading, with relatively few statistics backing up their claims. They argue that the Second Amendment to the Constitution is only giving the states the right to regulate militia activity and therefore possess and "bear" arms (Rowland 3). Some of the more extreme anti-gun lobby advocate repealing the Second Amendment altogether. Since the most extreme advocates of gun control wish to ban guns regardless of the Constitution, it becomes necessary to not just examine the law of the land, and the courts interpretation, but also the underlying philosophies of both sides of the debate.

Gun control and gun rights are crucial topics that have been debated for years. Some people believe that civilians should not have the right to own a gun while others believe it is our god given right to bear arms. The second amendment of the Bill of Rights states “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.”(Shermer). This is a right that society has had for years and is one of the main reasons why no solution has been reached yet. There are two main sides to this debate, Gun control advocates focus on the serious negative effects of gun availability on health and safety, while gun-ownership advocates emphasize the lawful use of guns and

Gun Control in the United States has gone out of control. The United States should enforce laws to not allow any guns in a house hold in order to reduce violence and crime in the country. Reducing the rate of crime in the United States, controlling big weapons, taxing ammunition, and gun collection can help make this happen. Gun Control can make this country a safer environment to live in.

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.

Slowly and steadily stealing into our lives like a shadowy hoard from the burning bowels of the earth, the fiery debate on gun control threatens to rend our country in two. Both sides often point deadly fingers at motives and character instead of arguments. Beliefs, founded and unfounded, range widely across the board. On one side of this treacherous issue, Mark Follman penned an article for Mother Jones titled “More Guns, More Mass Shootings – Coincidence?” in an attempt to destroy the pro-gun position. However, because he based upon a flawed worldview and some faulty logic, Follman comes to incorrect conclusions.

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

The legality of having guns and possessing firearms in the United States of America is well engraved within the Second Amendment of the nation’s constitution. However, the issue of gun regulation has remained a central topic in America’s public. Some people advocate for a total ban on gun possession, while others are totally against this idea. The shooting incident in Las Vegas weeks ago has raised controversial debates in the United States of America. In fact, the White House is concerned on the stand that President Trump will take on the issue of stricter gun laws. One of the cities that has gained the attention of both the legislators on this topic is Chicago. For its reputation for its low rate of gang arrests, lax punishments for gun law violations, and comparatively weak laws in accordance with surrounding states, it is justifiable to say that Chicago’s daily shootings are a clear indicator that strict state gun laws don’t work.