'Making Gun Signs A Big Deal'

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

Since the beginning of 2018 the United States has seen an increase in outcry both for and against gun control. One of the key contributors to the cesspool of argument is 18 year old Emma Gonzalez. While her goal of spreading awareness of gun violence is noble, her famous “We call B.S.” speech, which put her on the map of pro gun control, committed multiple fallacies. She fails her argument by using an appeal to emotions, appeal to authority, and ad hominem.

Ms. Hasselstrom has ethical appeal because she used credible personal situations to support her authority to possess a gun. Because she was such a peace-loving woman, carrying a gun would be a fallacy. Her stated cause and effects gave this article logical appeal on the subject of carrying guns for safety purposes. Although she establishes good

"Battleground America," written by Jill Lepore, provides a strong history of guns and the way they have changed in the eyes of the American through the years. She proves her point with strong evidence throughout her article, sprinkling it with opinion and argument that is strongly supported. She presents her argument to convince her audience that the open availability of guns allows citizens to undeservingly purchase them by displaying the credibility in her sources, using negative connotations in her speech, and the strength and objectivity only a strong logos appeal can provide.

Throughout the book, the target reader would likely continue to be infuriated. He/she would likely feel outraged as he/she learns that many “facts” about guns are really lies. He/she would also likely feel outraged when he/she discovers the times that a gun could have saved someone. For example, college student Amanda Collins had a concealed-carry license, but she was not allowed to take her gun with her to college; she “was brutally raped inside a parking garage, less than one hundred feet from campus authorities” (102). Rape is a very heinous and horrific crime, and any sane person would want to reduce the possibility of that crime occurring. Through Beck’s use of pathos, Beck incites anger and concern in his target readers and encourages them to strongly oppose gun control.

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.

On June 17, 2016, an editor from the St. Louis Post Dispatch published an article, “Now is the time for common-sense gun control,” that briefly talks about how gun lobbyists are striking fear on the citizens and how gun control advocates need to keep pushing harder. The writer also reviews the Second Amendment and how gun culture affects today’s society.

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

Throughout this paper I will be challenging the arguments of Jeff McMahan’s paper Why Gun ‘Control Is Not Enough where he concludes that the only effective form of gun ‘control’ would be for The United States to make it illegal to shoot a gun of any type. He begins this argument by citing the “central pillar” of the argument for those who are anti-gun control is that when more individuals own guns, there is a mindset that the entire population is safer. With this logic, it can be inferred that citizens feeling unsafe in the current environment of their country are those seeking protection, one way being through the purchase and ownership of a firearm. Safety is imperative part of ensuring peace of mind, which then impact the peace of the

By concealing the weapon, citizens can go about their day normally without being distracted by a handgun on someone’s person. Many Americans are beginning to grasp the concept that gun control laws are rapidly becoming useless. John C. Moorhouse and Brent Wanner, authors of “Gun Control Law Do Not Reduce Violent Crimes” State that the reason gun control is ineffective, is because it does next to nothing to stop criminals from getting their hands on firearms (Gun Control Laws Do Not Reduce). To reduce gun crime, more needs to be done to stop criminals, instead of focusing efforts on law abiding citizens, they are not the ones to worry about.

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.

In today’s politics, gun control is a big argument. The anti-gun advocates wants more gun control laws. The gun advocates side wants less gun control sides. They believe guns symbolize freedom and will help kept themselves safe. Anti-gun advocates believe stricter gun control laws will insure public safety and reduce the number of guns in irresponsible hands. As a way to help persuade people to become pro or anti-gun advocates, people write articles on gun control. Think Concealed Carry Makes You Safe? Think Again is an article about concealed carriers not being able to protect themselves. Texas Concealed Handgun Carries: Law-abiding Public Benefactors is an article about the change in arrest rates since Texas allowed citizens to carry concealed firearms.

In today’s society everything is debated. It is possible to trace most political debates to constitutional rights. One of the most controversial of these, is the second amendment. In a piece, written by Buteau and Fernandez, this can be seen. The article is titled “Guns on [C]ampus [P]olicy to be [D]ebated” and published in Florida International University’s “The Beacon”. Carrying firearms on school grounds has been argued in features like this for many years. Reading through it, the writers actually show us their stance and persuasion techniques. As this story is reviewed, the authors’ intentions and argument will be revealed.

Critics of placing a “Gun-Free Zone” sign in a gun-free zone argue that doing so endangers the lives of the innocent individuals within the premises. One case cited by the critics is the Cinemark Century 16 Theater in Aurora, Colorado shooting on July 20, 2012 where 12 were dead and 58 injured. According to the critics, Cinemark, like all other gun-free zones with such a sign, have become a magnet for those who want to kill numerous unarmed people (Lott, 2012). Instead of securing the people, an explicit “Gun-Free Zone” signage is like a come-on sign that invites criminals to commit crime knowing that they can do so freely without serious resistance as the law-abiding individuals are unarmed and thus unable to assault them

In this article, “We’re Past Thoughts and Prayers,” author Reed Galen insists that people should make a change in the surrounding environments in the United States. Mr. Galen supports this statement by using a factual and persuading tone. Galen’s purpose is to propel American citizens to act upon the topic of guns in order to make a safer, healthier lifestyle for all human beings. Mr. Galen uses a strategic style to appeal to Americans who feel should have a change in regulations when it comes to weapons by using rhetorical devices such as allusions, metaphors, and personification.