American Politician Sam Brownback expressed his views on gun control by saying, “I don't think there should be more gun control. I think there should be more education.” One of the most prominent issues in the United States right now is whether or not more strenuous and limiting gun restrictions should be put into place to prevent mass shootings and other catastrophic events in the future. Members of both gun lobby and gun control groups fight vigorously for what they believe in. My interlocutor is a statistician from the New York times named Leah Libresco. Her article titled, “I used to think gun control was the answer. My research told me otherwise” is a great example to use as the article documents her shift from being an avid gun control supporter, to coming to the realization that more strict gun laws might not be the answer. Similarly to Libresco, I feel that severe gun control is not the answer to stopping gun violence in America, as focusing on protecting potential victims, and reforming potential killers, and enforcing a ban on large firearms would be more effective. Libresco’s criticism of gun control stems from statistics proving that in other countries, gun control laws have not prevented mass shootings or other gun-related crimes. Also, she argues that some policies that are pro gun control’s only selling point is that gun-owners disagree with them. Certain policies also seem as they were written from the perspective of someone familiar with guns, when in
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.
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 author makes several main claims throughout his articles such as, “national news stories are virtually never done on permit holders stopping mass public shootings,” and “the proposals put forward by gun control advocates wouldn’t have stopped this attack.” The columnist firmly believes in the power of the second amendment and as such, he wants to limit the amount of new laws that control how much the people can hold and use weapons. The claims listed are claims of fact and policy respectively. He gives several examples of how these different prevented mass shootings were not widely advertised and how the ones that were not stopped were all over news stations to convince people that guns are not helping the common people. The author then proposes that the changes that gun control advocates propose will not make a difference and begins to give reasons why which makes this a claim of policy. He says that making a change will not make any change so the laws should be left the same as they are now, or they should be more inclusive to allow more people to carry a concealed weapon.
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.
With an increase in the number of mass shootings that have occurred in the United States in the last few years the issue of gun control laws has become a prevalent topic of debate throughout American society. This debate stems from two opposing arguments over gun control. Some feel gun control laws are fair and not the contributing factor to these mass shootings, whereas, others feel that there is an urgent need for strict laws in order to end the problem of mass shootings. There are numerous pros and cons to the enforcement of stricter gun control laws but we must note a few things: stricter gun control laws would interfere with the second amendment, it is not the gun that kills it is the individual, and it is ultimately not laws that are
Throughout the past several decades gun control has been put under scrutiny by the media and the general public. While the first major piece of gun control legislation was passed in 1911 in New York, it was not until the 1960’s that the gun control movement was truly galvanized(“Gun Control Reform”).This occurred because of a series of major political assassinations that led to the Gun Control Act being signed into law in 1968(“Gun Control Reform”). To this day the gun control movement lives on and many Americans believe that harsher gun control laws should be put into effect. These supposed gun laws range anywhere from a nationwide ban of assault weapons to a complete ban of guns. Supporters of gun control argue that taking away guns from
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.
There are many Americans who are opposed and many who are for the control of firearms. Robert Farago is an author and publisher of thetruthaboutguns.com, in his article, “Gun control is not the answer: Opposing view”, he states that gun control laws won’t stop criminals from committing mass shooting or other crimes. Farago gives an example of how president Obama created more gun control laws but he goes on to saying that with or without laws, criminals are still going to shoot or rob innocent people. He also gives reasons on how a law cannot prevent guns from falling into the wrong hands. The main idea of this article is to persuade and inform American citizens that with or without gun control laws, crimes will keep occurring. Farago has a strong belief that gun control acts will not
Regardless of the obvious risk posed by not having stricter gun laws and safety regulations, opponents still fight for gun rights. Melissa Leon’s article, “This is how Gun Owners of America responded to the Vegas shooting that killed 59 people, injured 500+ others” details the response of the Gun Owners of America’s response to the mass shooting in Las Vegas. “We cannot blame gun owners, the gun itself, or the liberties protected in the Second Amendment for how evil people abuse that freedom” (Leon). This group believes that the majority of people who own guns use them for
In the United States today, gun control is one of the most hot button issues in the political and social world. The debate on whether or not current gun laws are strict enough, what types of guns should be sold, and if they should be sold at all, is a large and ongoing one. While there are two very polarly different sides to the debate. The side of the debate, that aims to promote gun control is aiming to put a stop to the gun violence. However, Gun control or a gun ban, or even a complete repeal of the 2nd amendment, would not solve the problem of gun violence in this country. Not to mention, any ban on weapons should be considered as a violation of the second amendment. ( Document 2 ) Document 2, the second amendment, was put into the
As we engulf ourselves in politics for the election year, there has been frequent source of debate between the candidates; gun control. In the words of Patrick J. Charles of Britannica, gun control is “…politics, legislation,and enforcement of measures intended to restrict access to, the possession of, or the use of arms, specifically firearms.” Even taking away the political importance, gun control is a hot topic that is in every Americans mind as fear for personal safety is on the rise. This has been created by increased media attention and coverage of mass shootings, which seem to occur more frequently as time goes on. This has lead to the question: can we use laws and enforcement to reduce the violence? It shows creating laws to control or ban the purchasing and use of firearms is the most probable to be the solution to reducing gun violence while coinciding with proper firearm education.
Despite centuries of evidence that gun control laws do not lower crime, stop violence, or make society safer in any way, gun control advocates continue to chip away at our Second Amendment rights. For a group (yes, liberals) who typically don’t care for hard work, working hard to rob us of our freedom to keep and bear, seems to suit them just fine.
The second 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.” taking away our second amendment takes away our protection that was given to the people in the original rights of the constitution. Gun control has been a topic of controversy since the New Deal in which the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Federal Firearms Act of 1938 were enacted. Although some forms of gun control are useful such as background checks and the National Firearms act of 1938, people should not be limited by concealed carry permits or open carry laws. American citizens should not be restricted from the type of firearm they are allowed to buy, how they use them, or where they keep them unless it is unconstitutional.
“I have a very strict gun control policy: if there is a gun around, I want to be in control of it” (Clint Eastwood). Every year according to ATF statistics, over six million guns are sold on average in the United States alone. As of 2015, gunviolencearchive.org reported 46,350 incidents related to firearms. Out of those incidents 11,664 deaths were attributed by a firearm. “Staggering numbers on both fronts with no resolution in site. The second amendment 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” many have challenged this right, and it has become one of the most controversially debated subjects to date.
For many years, people have been pushing the American government to implement new laws that deal with gun control. Supporters of the argument claim that increased gun control will drastically reduce the crime rate in America. Nevertheless, a majority of gun control arguments are formed from strict control of data and emotional appeal. The mainstream media picks up these stories and broadcasts them to viewers without providing any context to them. While gun control activists assert that gun control is necessary, the American government should not ban guns because of the following reasons: potential vulnerability of innocent people being shot at by criminals and the inability for people to defend themselves against their own government.