Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Does gun control reduce crime
2nd amendment gun control debate
History of gun control in america essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Does gun control reduce crime
Since the early days, gun control has been a never-ending debate. It is because of the fast increase in crime, the fight for the right to own a hand gun, the introduction of legislation for gun control in order reduce the crime in the United States, that this issue has been hotly debated in recent years. The streets of America are now a war zone especially right here were we live. ?Florida has the highest crime rate of any state and the sixth highest homicide level?(www.guncite.com). A sad fact but true. Many people feel that gun control violates their right to own a gun the second amendment says so: ?the right to bear arms?. I personally share that point of view for it would not be in the constitution to begin with. However, there is no doubt that something must be done in order to reduce violence and to make America a freer country to live in. I believe that gun control should not take place for it does not reduce crime, it only increases the debates and as an alternative there should be a stronger education. First, gun control does not reduce crime. After doing my research I was impressed to find that guns and violence are not as linked as much as people think they are. Curtis Lovelace confirms that ?? Both Australia and England have already banned personal ownership of guns, but violent crime is not down in either country. In fact, in Australia violent crime is up in every category. From 1997 to 1999, murders were up 6.5%, and attempted murders rose by 12.5%. Increases w...
Deborah White configures the preeminent perception that Southern white women had of colored slave women. The initial impression was that all black women slaves were sexual deviants that were not fully equipped to fulfill their roles as slaves as they imposed a sort of “dangerous” sexual pressure in the community. The following vison of the common slave woman was that of a motherly nature in the way that the women were subject to have children for the sole purpose of renewing the source for slaves. No matter the outlook, it is clear that the slave women of the south were being forced to be flexible with their roles in order to please the slave
The meaning of American exceptionalism has evolved, but the era of American exceptionalism as a providential mission is drawing to a close.
...brought with it discrimination of African American women, “They were targets of brutality, the butt of jokes and ridicule, and their womanhood was denied over and over. It was a struggle just to stay free, and an even greater struggle to define womanhood” (162). As the men fought the war the women who were now dependent upon themselves more than ever had to take on the role of the father. The Mammy figure now stood up for herself and would often times leave the white family, the family they left would often have feelings of remorse for their tremendous loss. Women were standing up for themselves and where now the maker of their own destiny, but with that still came the harsh reality that they would be still the most vulnerable group in antebellum America. Many single African American women were faced with poverty and had a really hard time dealing with the war and depending on themselves. Deborah Gray White’s view of slave women shows us that their role was truly unique, they faced the harsh reality that they were not only women or African American, they were both, so therefore their experience was one of a kind and they lived through it, triumphed, and finally won their freedom.
Exceptionalism of a country is the idea that it holds different, more ethical decisions, than all the other countries through time. Some believe the great experiment of america is one of these great exceptions. However, slavery, the industrial revolution, and the expansion of the federal government have all threatened this idea of greatness.
“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.” The right of all Americans to bear arms is a right the Founding Fathers held to equal importance as the Constitution itself. Gun control laws directly violate this right and therefore should not even be under consideration. Even if that issue is overlooked, gun control advocates state that in order to reduce firearm related violence, gun control laws must be implemented to remove the violence caused by firearms. Although this may seem reasonable, the consequences of such laws are ironically counterproductive; they exacerbate the problem instead of fixing it. Besides the fact that the American Constitution guarantees its citizens the right to bear arms, the idea of restricting gun ownership in order to reduce firearm-related violence would ultimately fail given the previous experiments of gun control in England and in numerous states.
In the novel, the author proposes that the African American female slave’s need to overcome three obstacles was what unavoidably separated her from the rest of society; she was black, female, and a slave, in a white male dominating society. The novel “locates black women at the intersection of racial and sexual ideologies and politics (12).” White begins by illustrating the Europeans’ two major stereotypes o...
Deborah White uses various examples of situations regarding these characterizations from other pieces of work such as “Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl” by Harriet Jacobs, interviews, and other historical references. Through these examples, Deborah White is able to effectively relay, through historical context, how these women struggled with the assumption that all black female slaves were “Jezebels” until proven otherwise. Regarded as highly sexual women, those who were categorized as a “Jezebel” woman initially started because of African traditions prior to their enslavement and also excused “miscegenation, the sexual exploitation of black women, and the mulatto population”. Deborah White argues that these women faced a very unique situation because their sexual behavior could result in being treated better or worse, depending on the situation and the master; because population growth was inevitable, white men seemed to believe that this proved their “lewd and licentious behavior”. Also, the conditions in which these women lived “helped imprint the Jezebel image on the white mind” even though this environment was created by these men “which ensured female slave behavior fulfilled their expectations”. In contrast to the “Jezebel” figure, white men also created the “Mammy” figure who was a loyal servant to the white family as well as a surrogate mother for the both black and white children. This position for a black female slave helped “endorse the service of black women in Southern households” (61). Therefore, both of these characterizations were to justify the treatment of black
Can a story contain more than one antagonist? In “The Yellow Wallpaper” by Charlotte Perkins Gilman there is an overwhelming amount of conflict the unnamed narrator must endure. The protagonist of “The Yellow Wallpaper” is the narrator who is suffering from depression and is taken to a house for the summer to rest. In “The Yellow Wallpaper”, the wallpaper is the antagonist because it causes the narrator to have a breakdown at the end of the short story; John, the narrator’s husband, cannot be the antagonist because he is doing what he believes is best for her, and the narrator cannot be the antagonist because she wants to improve her mental state.
Firstly, stricter laws will reduce violence, and gun control means crime control. There are some countries in the world that have introduced stricter laws and were successful to control the crimes ...
The Second Amendment of the United States protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms. It was adopted on December 15, 1791 along with the rest of the Bill of Rights. The United States Government should not infringe on those rights by the enforcement of gun control against law-abiding citizens. Gun control does not reduce crime, does not stop criminals from obtaining guns, and does not address the real issue of violent crime. There is no evidence that gun control affects the crime rate. The United States government is attempting to reduce violent crime by controlling the amount of guns on the market, who is allowed to purchase a gun, and what type of gun a person is allowed to purchase. The only people affected by gun control laws are the law-abiding citizen that should be allowed to purchase firearms without the government’s interjection.
Kant largely focused on Categorical Imperative and had said “Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” Kant saw the later as somewhat of a moral compass. Kant suggested to people if they were unsure if something was moral or not, to ask themselves what rule they would be following if they did, and they could then determine their
Gun control is an awfully big issue in the United States today. Many people in America don’t agree with the gun control laws that they have today. Gun control laws only take guns and freedom away from law-abiding citizens. Many citizens have their own reasons for owning a gun. Why would the government want to make it harder for people to own a gun? People that own guns aren’t very likely to be attacked by criminals. Owning a handgun is one of the best ways of protection when used correctly. The second amendment states “the right to bear arms”; does this grant everyone the right to own a gun? Gun control laws have not been proven to do anything for citizens. Gun control laws just make it harder for the good guy average Joe to own a gun. Gun control laws are not a good idea, and are taking part in the loss of our freedom that was given to us.
Morality has been a subject of many philosophical discussions that has prompted varied responses from different philosophers. One of the most famous approaches to morality is that of Immanuel Kant in his writing Groundwork of Metaphysics of Morals. Kant in this work argues that the reason for doing a particular action or the drive to do good things is a fundamental basis of defining moral quality in a person. To him, an action could be considered morally right only if the motivation behind doing that action was out of ‘goodwill’. When he defines these moral rules, he characterizes them in the form of imperatives – the hypothetical imperative and categorical imperative. While hypothetical imperatives deal with motivations and actions that lead to a particular end, categorical imperatives are a product of rational behavior in human beings. Kant considers such categorical imperatives to be the moral basis for life.
When somebody reflects the hardships of slavery, they typically think solely of the treatment towards African Americans. What most people are not aware of is how women were treated, whether they were of color or not. In Harriet Jacobs book, Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, she explains “Slavery is terrible for men; but it is far more terrible for women. Superadded to the burden common to all, they have wrongs, and sufferings, and mortifications peculiarly their own.” The cruel treatment towards female slaves and the struggles held by Southern women during the Civil war are disregarded by the majority of people today, even though it is a significant part of American history and still affects society. Slaveholders would often rape and impregnate their slave women, and then never let the women care for their mixed children. Actions like this contribute to prostitution today, yet people still do not consider prostitution a form of slavery. These truths are tangible today due to African American authors Susie King Taylor and Kate Stone. Thankfully, white abolitionist women such as Ida B. Wells and Mary Chesnut were around to stand up for slaves and women.
...or achieving good consequences has no moral value. It does not mean it is evil but a person may not achieve good will in this way. Categorical imperative commands us to exercise our wills in a particular way by not performing some action or other. Through Kant, readers are able to distinguish how categorical imperative can be determined through ethical deliberation.