Nicholas Kristof Blind Spot Summary

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

2014 essay titled “Our Blind Spot About Guns” makes an astute comparison of car regulation to

In the article “Some Inconvenient Gun Facts for Liberals,” by Nicholas Kristof, Kristof’s main point is to bring awareness and inform individuals about the status of gun control in his/her country. Kristof punctuates that the government is passing laws concerning gun control and regulation, but ultimately he provides evidence that those laws have no benefit overall to the people. Kristof converses that some groups formed due to gun control, but they too do not relate to guns, such as the nonprofit group named Cure Violence. He addresses that the government is ignorant to these problems, and he emphasizes how they needs to be resolved. This article portrays Kristof’s call to action because he is recognizing that the people need to help bring

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.”

People who appreciate activities like shooting competitions and hunting, use firearms responsibly. This use contrasts with other uses, which often result in consequences that can be both intended and unintended. With past and present mass shootings, and acts of bloodshed perpetrated with the usage of weapons; has triggered a focus on gun control that once again has been brought into the spotlight. The purpose of the ongoing gun argument addresses the crimes that are committed with guns. This issue of gun control separated people into two groups: those who believe that carrying guns might prevent some crimes and fatalities, and those who don’t. There are individuals who believe absolutely the reverse: that more crime and deaths

Gun violence is one of the most serious problems in the United States. Each year in the U.S., more than 35,000 people are killed by guns, a death rate much higher than that in any other industrial nations. In 1997, approximately 70 percent of the murders in the United States were committed with guns. However, ironically, the United States also is the country that has the most gun control laws. Gun control laws generally focus on passing legislation—by local state, or national government—to restrict legal ownership of certain firearms. Seemingly, gun control laws may decrease criminals’ access to guns, but in fact the same laws also have their negative effects. Thus, the controversy over gun control is always heated. But my paper is not

While Americans were contemplating gun control proposals in the wake of mass shootings at a Colorado School, another gunman massacred 50 people in a club in Orlando. This incident brought heated political exchanges between President Obama and Trump, the Republican presidential candidate. It is estimated that in 2015 alone, there were more than 351 mass shootings in the United States. This is a worrying trend that should be reversed as soon as possible. Surprisingly, the trend has divided Americans into two groups. On one extreme end, there are those Americans who believe that the government should enforce gun control. On the other end, some Americans insist that stricter gun controls will not help in the fight against killings. In this light, this paper will try to provide a detailed analysis of the gun control debate while highlighting the various points made by the proponents and opponents of the gun control. The essay posits that gun control is counterproductive.

According to the Coalition for Gun Control, last year a total of 291 people were killed by handguns in Australia, Sweden, Great Britain, Japan, and Switzerland. In the United States more than 24,000 people will be killed by the end of this year. So what is the big difference between the U.S. and these other countries? In these other countries it nearly impossible to buy any kind of gun. In these countries there are no gun shows. In these countries you can’t buy a gun at a pawnshop or your local Wal-Mart. These countries have strict gun laws and are all about gun control. In this paper I will discus the correct interpretation of the Second Amendment, why guns are such a problem in the U.S., and why guns are more likely to kill a friend

High regulation of guns has a significant impact on violence in our country. According to Our Blind Spot about Guns, Nicholas Kristof states that by banning guns it would not make the problem of violence any better. By

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.

Gun control laws should regulate production, distribution, ownership and use of firearms by civilians. Gun control laws are not intended to dispossess law abiding citizens of licensed firearms but to intervene on reckless use of firearms that cause harm to the public. Gun control should also make it difficult for criminals to access firearms. Armed civilians have in many instances deterred acts of crime from being instigated by scaring away criminals. Nonetheless, gun laws can only be described as immensely lax. This essay seeks to argue for the enactment of strict gun control laws by highlighting the dangers posed by guns in the hands of members of the public.

Gun control has remained a debated issue in the United States of America for several years. Every time a horrible event involving gun violence happens, the debate about gun control starts up again. In the article, "Refuting Anti-Gun Control Arguments", John Sager tries to prove that anti-gun control activists seem blinded by untruthful information. The arguments set forth by anti-gun control citizens holds more truth to how humans behave with gun usage than the arguments set forth by gun control supporters. Stricter laws and licensing of guns will not successfully save the lives of American citizens who have a constitutional right to own guns.

People kill people.” Many republicans, who are against gun regulations, argue that guns don’t kill people and that people kill people in an attempt to prove that regulating guns doesn’t change the aggressive nature of some individuals. Kristof refutes this claim by, again, comparing guns to cars and by explaining that although sometimes drivers are responsible for crashes, this does not mean that we should inhibit regulations that will help reduce the numbers of deaths that occur due to car accidents. The authors condescending tone and comparisons to car regulation not only help him refute many of the claims that republicans make against gun control, but they also help shows the reader that republicans are hypocritical when it comes to regulations and that they, in fact, were supportive of certain types of regulation which ended up saving millions of people. Because his article is published in the Opinion Pages of the New York Times, a sector of the New York Times that is loaded with opinionated articles written by the public, Kristof is able to use informal language, a condescending tone, and metaphors throughout his work in order to successfully convey his message and persuade his readers.

Having looked at the basic outline of why stricter gun control is being advocated for by lawmakers, several statistics need to be explained. In 2012, out of all homicides in the United States, 60% were committed by firearm; compared to 10% in the U.K., and 18.2% in Australia. This statistic is shocking, and it gives advocates for gun control a reason to be extremely anxious for reform. As well as the number of murders committed with guns per capita in the U.S. in 2012 being almost 30 times more than the U.K, there have been about 1.4 million gun deaths in the U.S. between 1968 and 2011. That number surpasses the amount of deaths accounted for in all wars that the U.S. has ever been involved in, from the War of Independence to Iraq.

The controversial issue of gun control is one of the most debatable topics among politicians and civilians alike. This is because of the complexity of gun control and the long history that is related to the subject. Gun control is typically an effort, by the government, to create legislation that regulates the sale and use of firearms within the country. There are various arguments that surround this topic which include gun-related violence, accidents, self-defense, murders, suicide, constitutional rights, and so on. James Q. Wilson, a professor who has taught at Pepperdine University, Harvard University, and the University of California, Los Angeles, and a published author of several books, take a negative stance on the subject of gun control. Wilson contributed to the gun control debate in the last few years with his written op-ed article. According to Wilson, there is no possible method to eradicate the hundreds and millions of guns that exist within the country, restrictive gun laws will not significantly affect the United States’ murder rate, and that guns play an important role in self-defense in everyday lives. Contrary to what Wilson believes, strict gun control is necessary and should be enforced to ensure public safety because gun laws have the power to produce a positive outcome in the long run, reduce gun-related violence, and reduce the numerous risks that gun ownership open.